The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "Bioethics"
 All Comments / On "Bioethics"
    When I first started writing on the internet in the early aughts times were different. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) was more science fiction than a topic which touched the realm of reality. Yes, there was screening for a handful of classic recessive diseases, and somewhere Leon Kass was reflecting upon human dignity being undermined by...
  • Matt says:

    While it’s nowhere near as horrible as most of the genetic diseases mentioned, I’ve got clinical depression. I’ve chosen not to have children partly because I wouldn’t want it passed on considering how much it affected me throughout most of my life. Should ethicists be “troubled” at the loss of my unborn potential child?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] on the Charles (interesting) New C-27J Cargo Planes Stored In Arizona Boneyard We Have the Technology to Avoid Suffering Why Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Death Is So Scary: The ever-present danger of relapsing. One of the […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I know a women who had Huntington’s disease and she approached it from the cowards approach (my opinion that I kept it to myself because it was none of my business) rather than this women who approached a genetic disease from one of courage and purpose. The women with a 50% chance of Huntington’s disease refused to find out if is she was a carrier or not and choose not to have any children. Now what is an ethicist, and who do they think they are? Where do they come off announcing I am here to tell you proper conduct because I have thought deeper on this issue than you have and now I shall tell you how to lead your life. It’s a personal decision, here’s my ethical summation, MYOB. Of course some folks need and ask to be lead by the nose, but I ain’t one of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It’s worth inquiring into the entire field of bioethics. Why does it exist in the first place? Why are bioethicists so much more influential than ethicists who deal with IT, social media, and even AI?

    Imagine a whole cottage industry of aeroethicists around the turn of the 20th century. How much would the development of air travel have been delayed if they had held sway? The same question can be asked of automobiles, assembly line manufacturing, nuclear physics, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • JU, that’s for recessive traits. For dominant traits, following this system would mean that a carrier is never allowed to have children. Yet Halachaic experts largely agree that being e.g. BRCA positive (probably the most common AND the most famous dominant condition in the Ashkenazi Jews) are fit to marry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Most orthodox Jews follow by a system by which they get tested but are unaware of the results. When dating each side calls a phone number and enters their ID number and are told if they are compatible for each other. This reduces stigma and allows the rabbinate to control which diseases are tested for. They will only allow testing and embryo selection for diseases which kill in childhood.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A new opinion piece in The New England Journal of Medicine is titled A New Era in Noninvasive Prenatal Testing. It is free, so I commend you to read the whole thing. But this is the key section, "A new, noninvasive prenatal test is poised to change the standard of care for genetic screening. Cell-free...
  • Also most people know little about embryology. If they say they approve of abortion in the first trimester but not the second, then reading between the lines they’re really saying they’re against abortion the more ‘human’ the foetus gets.

    At 9 weeks the foetus already has tissues like a head and embryonic limbs as you can see in the picture provided. So that will affect people’s decisions more than the actual trimester IMO.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I think everyone can agree its better if severely dysgenic traits disappear even though we may disagree about the ethics of abortions. Nonetheless, only an unwarranted faith in human nature would make anyone think a combination of reproductive choice and advanced genetic screenings will in fact be beneficial over the long term.

    We all know what ‘orchid children’ are – gifted children may be exceptionally difficult to raise and present the parents with behavioural problems.

    We all know most Down’s Syndrome aborters are motivated by the extra effort needed to raise such children, not by a belief in some kind of eugenics.

    We also know the cultural ideal is of an airhead with good looks, not necessarily someone intelligent (to the degree smartness enters into it, parents misconceive of intelligence as simply passing tests by rote to get through the school system, rather than in terms of innovation or critical thinking – passing degrees by rote is what brings social prestige to the parents). And we know society doesn’t like smart people questioning authority.

    Ultimately attempts at negative eugenics must be strictly state controlled else not practiced at all lest people make short-sighted decisions. Reproduction must be divorced from individual, parental choice lest screenings backfire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The ultimate question is what are we going to do with all that information?

    It should be obvious that the more intelligent, thoughtful, career-oriented people (e.g. “yuppie” types) are going to use this technology to have better kids and those that tend to pop out kids without thinking about it (e.g. underclass) will not. The result, at least in this country, will be an increasing bifurcation in the population.

    It will be different in other countries. East Asian countries, for example, will see this kind of technology universally used throughout the population. I don’t know about Europe or the “southern” world (e.g. Latin America, South Asia, etc.). The overseas Chinese of S.E. Asia will certainly use this technology

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Your piece on “…trisomies” reminded me of a new paper on the possibility of eventually inactivating an entire extra chromosome in the same manner as the normal inactivation of one of the X chromosomes of a pair in female embryogenesis (Barr Bodies); i.e.: leading toward “…successful trisomy silencing in
    vitro.” As you suggest, both technical and moral issues seem to be accelerating toward us. I hope their complexities can be laid out clearly for discussion and sympathetic understanding in an
    increasingly frightened world.

    More on the Sciam.com site:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=researchers-turn-off-down-syndrome-genes

    and at Nature.com:

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12394.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Sorry for stating the obvious: this “reality” is already very evident right now, in some parts of the globe, with sex-based abortion.

    Indian experience with selective abortion of girl foetuses constitutes a good test of what happens when you have a non-invasive test for an “undesirable” characteristic. And in the case of sex ratios, the social cost is pretty obvious. So for characteristics with no obvious conflict between individual and social benefit, the effect will presumably be even larger.

    My guess is that the coming wave of selective abortion will provide interesting sociological data: what is it that people find “undesirable”, to the extend that they would go through abortion and/or IVF to avoid it? Given the cost, this “natural experiment” will presumably be much more reliable than any interview-based data.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’ll bet xtians are *really* gonna start attacking genetics and science in general if they find out this is leading to more abortions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Malorye Allison’s written a review about this in the latest Nature Biotechnology too http://cirge.stanford.edu/Allison_Genomic_Testing.pdf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dmitry Pruss
    It is quite probable, but it will require one more technological revolution in sequencing. A large fraction of severely penetrant mutations, especially de novo mutations, involve genomic rearrangements over repetitive sequences. Today's "next-gen" (now-gen) is likely to improve beyond substitution detection and into small indel and unique-sequence fusions and rearrangements. But to resolve repeats, that would require a different technology, like single-molecule nanopore long-read for example. It's been promised for some time, but the promises sort of fizzled?


    Then the number of available molecules of fetal DNA may still be a problem?


    I'm afraid that the imminent solution will be legal or ethical rather than technical. Either people will learn to leave with insufficiently reliable tests, or the societies will frown on them (insurers won't cover, obgyns won't accept, ethicists won't allow...)

    yeah, aware of the pacbio fiasco. but i’m hopeful that 10 years is enough time that someone will come up with something that produces very long reads (relatively).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Razib Khan
    re: last sentence, any reason that these are not all likely to be overcome as problems within the next decade?

    It is quite probable, but it will require one more technological revolution in sequencing. A large fraction of severely penetrant mutations, especially de novo mutations, involve genomic rearrangements over repetitive sequences. Today’s “next-gen” (now-gen) is likely to improve beyond substitution detection and into small indel and unique-sequence fusions and rearrangements. But to resolve repeats, that would require a different technology, like single-molecule nanopore long-read for example. It’s been promised for some time, but the promises sort of fizzled?

    Then the number of available molecules of fetal DNA may still be a problem?

    I’m afraid that the imminent solution will be legal or ethical rather than technical. Either people will learn to leave with insufficiently reliable tests, or the societies will frown on them (insurers won’t cover, obgyns won’t accept, ethicists won’t allow…)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Razib Khan
    yeah, aware of the pacbio fiasco. but i'm hopeful that 10 years is enough time that someone will come up with something that produces very long reads (relatively).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dmitry Pruss
    The key point of the article is statistical in nature. Even tests with seemingly very sensitivity and specificity numbers may have inappropriately low predictive value if the condition is very rare. This has a very strong relevance for the headline: for the tests to expand from the common triploidies to other, far less common grave congenital conditions, the techniques must be proven to be much more specific. Sequencing has a potential to get there, but depth of coverage / avl copy number / fluctuating sequence-specific error rates are an issue.

    re: last sentence, any reason that these are not all likely to be overcome as problems within the next decade?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry Pruss
    It is quite probable, but it will require one more technological revolution in sequencing. A large fraction of severely penetrant mutations, especially de novo mutations, involve genomic rearrangements over repetitive sequences. Today's "next-gen" (now-gen) is likely to improve beyond substitution detection and into small indel and unique-sequence fusions and rearrangements. But to resolve repeats, that would require a different technology, like single-molecule nanopore long-read for example. It's been promised for some time, but the promises sort of fizzled?


    Then the number of available molecules of fetal DNA may still be a problem?


    I'm afraid that the imminent solution will be legal or ethical rather than technical. Either people will learn to leave with insufficiently reliable tests, or the societies will frown on them (insurers won't cover, obgyns won't accept, ethicists won't allow...)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The key point of the article is statistical in nature. Even tests with seemingly very sensitivity and specificity numbers may have inappropriately low predictive value if the condition is very rare. This has a very strong relevance for the headline: for the tests to expand from the common triploidies to other, far less common grave congenital conditions, the techniques must be proven to be much more specific. Sequencing has a potential to get there, but depth of coverage / avl copy number / fluctuating sequence-specific error rates are an issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Razib Khan
    re: last sentence, any reason that these are not all likely to be overcome as problems within the next decade?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Obsession. I've been obsessed with many things in my life, from specific women to sundry topics. But I've never known obsession until I had a child. Perhaps others are not like me, but the monomaniacal need to know as much as you can about your future child as soon as possible gripped me early on....
  • Before my son was born, I wanted to know everything I could about him. I wanted to be an informed parent. I wanted to be prepared. I didn’t seek out additional testing, but I wanted to know EVERYthing that any testing indicated. I had no specific concerns regarding my-child-under-construction. Certainly I wanted a healthy, essentially normal child; but, more importantly I wanted to prepare for the child I would have. If testing indicated possible/probable deviations or deficits, I wanted to have that information to plan for the best life I could give my child.

    If find the child’s right not to know argument a bit peculiar. They would not be born knowing. I expect that most parents would share the information when appropriate, much as any other information.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Razib (from comment #13):

    “the reality is that we don’t need bioethicists. we need ethicists, moralists, etc. we need to establish the values that we as a society hold. from that the rest will follow….”

    In total agreement. I took a number of ethics classes as an undergrad, one of which was a bioethics class. I was profoundly interested in the the other ethics classes, as they actually focused on what are values should be and why, and discussion of applications was peripheral, just to show how it might play out (because, just as you mention, once you find the values, determining what to actually do is rather straightforward).

    However, in the bioethics class, the discussions and the academic literature were all about arguing over the applications as if we had already determined what are values should be, but different bioethicists would argue using opposing ethical theories. The field in general seems to only accept four ethical principles (beneficience, nonmalficience, autonomy, and justice) rather than delving more into traditional ethical frameworks, like consequentialism, Kantianism, and virtue ethics (although those are surely used in the field here and there). Given that justice is mentioned separately from the other three, it doesn’t appear that their view of justice is broad and encompassing like Plato might envision it, thus their total scope seems rather limiting and un-unified. Almost all of the disagreements between bioethicists on varying issues seemed to stem from some valuing autonomy more than beneficience or one or more of the others, and vice versa. So, to say the least, despite my initial interest in the class, by the end of the semester I was tired of dealing with what seemed more like thoughtless politics than honest philosophy.

    (I’m almost surprised how rarely people question their normative values. Even the bioethicists would make lengthy arguments while slyly mentioning how they’re not going to go into the question of why they’re using the particular values that they are. It’s obvious that a Homo sapiens that doesn’t question their normative values, but operates on them, would have high utility, but surely just the slightest reflection on why one should care about the values one holds should be enough to floor one with humility, right? It did for me at least, from an early age. That being said, it does seem rather impossible to not operate on some values, even if one is totally uncertain of what they should be. It’s not like you can live your life without making decisions. But now I’m starting ramble on…)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “may conflict with children’s rights to not know”?

    How can anyone have a right to not now something? I can understand having a right to tell someone to shut their bleeping mouth, that I don’t want to hear what they are saying….but if the hypothetical person I told to shut up keeps on talking the issue is my annoyance and not some violation of my imaginary right not to know something.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A parent who is willing to “pony up for prenatal sequencing” obviously does have specific concerns in mind and is far more likely simply to have that child killed than to agnonize over the decision of whether or not to “encourage” them in school.

    WOW! incredible. you should go into the mind-reading industry, you have such an awesome comprehension of human motivations. now i have to admit that i had a pillow at-the-ready to smother my daughter as i was perusing her genotyping results.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Rather simple minded, even disingenuous, examples and hypothetical scenarios if you ask me. A parent who is willing to “pony up for prenatal sequencing” obviously does have specific concerns in mind and is far more likely simply to have that child killed than to agnonize over the decision of whether or not to “encourage” them in school. Of course plenty of good people will always be pleased to welcome a child of even marked disability, eg Down Syndrome, into their lives and ironically the small fraction that do will actually be used as marketing by the proponents and purveyors of eugenics to make its practice more palatable to the majority by evoking the euphemism of “choice.” If you aren’t afraid of the effect that eugenics will have on society you should be. And if you think it is unlikely to come to pass, consider that one of the current prenatal diagnostics company is named “Verinata” which means “born true,” the exact Latin equivalent of the Greek roots of “eugenic.”

    [note: i blocked this person from posting further. they're pissed and are trying to evade them. why did i block them? too much "asshole." keep that in mind when the asshole urge comes over you because "it's the internet."]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I can’t help but to think a very similar debate occurred as ultra-sounds were developed. The abortion critics claiming that if you knew your child had a deformity or other visible problems that an abortion would be sought after. Yet today, this is a common practice often paid for by insurance companies. I can not believe insurance companies would not sign on to this as they would likely know the likely health of their soon-to-be customers, and that kind of knowledge can be very valuable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #12, I agree with you in that there are bound to be negative things that arise from this. Some day we will discover how to stop ageing and that will in all likelihood cause massive unrest.

    Let’s just hope that good ethics win the battle in the long run.

    #14, and that is probably just one example in many

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #11, some medical geneticists believe that ‘unexpected’ child death from infection, etc., have to do with undiagnosed homozygous deficiencies. many of these children may become adults and never die. that may be one thing where high coverage whole-genome sequencing may be very efficacious.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #12, yep. it’s the future. bioethicists seem to only tackle the tentative present perpetually. the reality is that we don’t need bioethicists. we need ethicists, moralists, etc. we need to establish the values that we as a society hold. from that the rest will follow….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I didn’t mean to imply that it was inherently bad or that it would “traumatize” your children or that you should not be allowed to do so. IMO, this is a choice to be made by the child when they able to consent.

    This does bring up an issue that, as a parent, has troubled me for some time. How far should a parent go to improve the life of or opportunities for their children? I know someone with a son who is short (not a little person, just short). Because the child is outside the bell curve for height the doctors recommended injections of human growth hormone. Granted, the son may appreciate it one day when he’s much older (and possibly taller), but it seems like a bit of an overreach by the parents. I’m not implying that having your child’s genome sequenced will have a physical impact, but it makes me question how far I would be willing to go as a parent. I have no doubts that we will eventually see drugs (marketed to parents) that promise to enhance your child. We see it now with several shady DTC genetic testing companies promising to tell you if your child will be an athlete or violin superstar. And to get even more futuristic, what about things like memory wipes or bionic implants. If ever child in your child’s classroom is taking performance enhancing drugs or is getting bionic implants, are you putting your child at a disadvantage for not doing the same?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #8, The argument can be turned over, where NOT doing prenatal sequencing is considered irresponsible. It can be likened to not regularly checking up on the health of your child.

    Let’s say they make a discovery of a genetic deficiency that would half a person’s life expecancy, and the deficiency can be repaired if it is treated early enough in life. An overly simplified case to be sure, but genetic discoveries that once diagnosed can be used to greatly improve the life quality of a person are bound to surface at a vastly increased pace in the near future. To me, sequencing your child is caring.

    After my children are old enough to make an informed decision, I believe I will pass their sequencing information to them and let them do with them what they please. Until that point, I feel it would be my responsibility to look after them, genetically and otherwise.

    EDIT: To add some FYI in case someone is not aware, the effects of events in early stages of the lifespan of an organism are HUGE. The more we learn about genetics and biology, the more clear the importance of tackling problems early on becomes. You definitely do not delay any treatments to your child until later on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • re: abortion. if abortion is a big issue in this matter they should talk A LOT about abortion then. abortion is a big deal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #8, there is a big difference between a physical change (piercing, circumcision) and a mental one in my book. not to get all ‘futuristic’ i am willing to bet in the next few decades we’ll be able to choose memory wipes too. if you are concerned enough i invite you to offer to purchase some for my traumatized children ;-) but, seeing as there is heritability in personality i doubt they’d be keen on the purchase.

    in any case, do what you want to do. spare me the lectures on what i should do. at least until the parents who punch their kids in the face and diddle them at night are looked into. bigger fish to fry….

    The early adopter has prepared him or herself for the potential unintended consequences that would cause the bioethicist to wring his or her hands.

    there are many unintended consequences of in vitro fertilization and delayed motherhood. the reason bioethicists don’t spend their time writing about this is that it’s become banal. therefore, i submit the issue isn’t unintended consequences, but novelty.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I think rather than to satisfy your own curiosity, you should wait until the child is old enough to make an informed decision. I have 2 young children and feel that, unless medically necessary, having their genomes sequenced (or genotyped) is a bit like reading their diaries (although, neither is yet old enough to write, let alone know what a diary is). Even though they are young, I feel there are some decisions best made on their own. It’s the same reason why I would not have a child’s ears pierced or have them baptized (or which ever religious tradition you prefer).

    Please note, that I am not speaking against the technology, the dissemination of knowledge, or genomics in general. Indeed, I am a huge proponent of the use of NGS technologies in medicine and think that we’ll see incredible advancements in medicine in the next 5-10 years specifically because of NGS technologies. I just see this particular application as premature.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • While I once again find myself in broad concurrence Razib, you must realize that in opposing the mush-talkers, you are taking the progressive viewpoint.

    Never mind that the mush-talkers are typically thought of as “progressives” in some sense. They are making a very conservative argument.

    1.We should fear change because it will open up a Pandora’s Box of repercussions, and society will be changed.
    2. Virtually any change away from the status quo will likely be a change for the worse – or at least that the positives far outweigh the potential negatives.
    3. They would deny free agency to individuals in favor of maintaining social norms.

    I look at this argument, and I see Edmund Burke all over it. And that’s being generous.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Re: $5,000 genome with 10x covering: I’d pay in a heart beat. Forget the new car comparision (although it’s a good one), I payed nearly as much for my old Jeep last year.

    I was talking about the future of genomics with a total layperson the other day and her main question was “…and what good is all that testing? What does it tell us?” Unfortunately, as I was trying to explain the utility, I realized that the reasons I was giving are probably not important to anyone but genophiles, and especially not to the layperson who is a generally non-curious creature. I think the sad answer to my interlocutor’s question is that it will depend on how much the medical establishment accepts wide-scale sequencing and how they choose to implement it. The answer isn’t really up to us, I fear.

    I often wonder how the genome-era will affect medical students, because it’s my understanding that most MDs are not trained to know much about genomics in a general sense at all, but rather the hereditary patterns of specific diseases. I wonder, will genomics become a part of any decent medical curriculum in the coming years, or will genetic counselors just experience a boom?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I just wonder about the child who will grow up and know that he/she has got this mutation, possibly inducing that kind of disease… Your arguments are correct, but I am not sure everybody is aware of this ‘deterministic’ problem. And here we go to the parental power debate, which is endless.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Upon reading the first lines of this piece; I didn’t think I was going to “like” the author. He introduces himself as “obsessive” and then proceeds to dismiss the entire field of bioethics with a derisive wave of the hand.

    To say that the bioethics industry’s …. “bread & butter is to trade in flimsy and specious reasoning, which might appeal to politicians who are will to purchase specious reasoning for purposes of their demagoguery” ; is quite an insulting opening… (albeit, funny in a way …touché, Sir).

    My personal view is that the ability for “early adopters” to pursue prenatal genomic information is VERY different than when such testing becomes the standard or even widely adopted.

    The early adopter has prepared him or herself for the potential unintended consequences that would cause the bioethicist to wring his or her hands. Also, the early adopter is willing to put their money where their mouth is with regard to testing.

    Not so with the (now hypothetical) next wave of parents obtaining prenatal genomic testing as part of (soon to be) routine prenatal care. This second set of parents may not be prepared or willing to accept the genomic information obtained from their fetus particularly if the information is bad news or (even worse) if the information is simply ambiguous.

    For this next wave of prenatal genomically informed parents we (health care consumers and the public in general) also must consider the COST of such a service, the cost of the additional testing that it would provoke (in many cases leading to a dead ends or a false alarms) and most importantly; who is going to pay for all of this stuff.

    The well informed (ahem) obsessive consumer who is paying for genomic testing out of pocket with a baseline level of interest, curiousity and funding is very different from the average prenatal patient who will (eventually) be “offered” this type of testing as an “option” during routine prenatal care.

    The bioethical concerns remain.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What has to be refuted is the assumption that knowledge is harmful to the public.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Hi,

    I feel very much the same than you do when it comes to the often groundless concerns that people express when it comes to prenatal genetic diagnosis.

    However, some people may find it disingenuous to say that abortion is a totally different debate. I have no doubt that widespread use of prenatal genetic diagnosis will increase the abortion rate. Right now, more than 90% of pregnancies diagnosed with trisomy are terminated, and as it becomes possible to diagnose more conditions, the same will surely happen with those too.

    So is it therefore not entirely justified to mix the abortion debate and the debate on prenatal genetic diagnosis?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I think you might enjoy last week’s BBC Comedy Of The Week which is available as a podcast. It’s an episode of “Brian Gulliver’s Travels” with info at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01lz1cj.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • As they say, read all about it. I'm rather ambivalent. 23andMe has a business rationale to go in this direction, so I don't begrudge them their decision. The problem, at least from a legal perspective, is that they're providing medical advice at least implicitly. And I think this medical direction is really where the big...
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    It’s easy to see genomic data regulation in romantic narrative terms — The plucky little guys who want to be free! The big, bad institutions who want to control them! — and it’s also a trap. Interpreting genomic information in a medically useful way is very, very complicated. It’s easy to do badly — and people may make life-altering decisions based on bad information.

    Gene-testing companies already have a track record of offering tests unsupported by unsupported by clinical evidence, such as CYP450 testing to determine antidepressant dosage. A let-the-market-regulate-itself, buyer-beware approach isn’t any more desirable than it would be for new drugs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • So long as personal genomics interfaces are primitive, the FDA won’t worry that any implicit medical advice is unwarranted. But making a “slicker app” is not intellectually neutral — it carries with it a claim that the data are meaningful to people without the background to understand the primitive version. For genes of drastic effect there’s little difficulty. But relative risk estimates are fraught with (and cannot be separated from) interpretive vagaries. There will always be a category of scores which are only global probabilities and aren’t strong data about individuals. The specific way a “slicker app” presents these carries a value judgment that the FDA might deem an aspect of doctor-patient relations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #3, i’m not. my point is that better app design doesn’t require FDA approval. that will come if there is money in the area (or, if nerds take sufficient interest re: open source).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I wouldn’t underestimate the need for slicker interfaces. What we have now is not up to the task, and would certainly lighten the burden in terms of educating general public/physicians methinks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The only clean approach is that the people who get/sell the data and the people who advise about its meaning should be separately licensed, if licensed at all, and separately priced. Because I buy SNP chip results from one firm should not obligate me to buy that firm’s advice. The reason for this is simple conflict of interest, in that the data seller makes an implicit statement about the data’s importance. It’s not in their interest to be clear about how few SNPs are truly useful. The buyer is already free to take the data to any interpreter, including those with purely educational, not financial, motives, of course. Yet the FDA needs to avoid sanctioning any particular, implicit medical importance attached to the sale of raw data.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • From their announcement:

    > We are confident that our initial application to the FDA is complete and comprehensive. Being the first in the industry to announce we are actively working toward FDA clearance of our direct-to-consumer service demonstrates our commitment to make personal genetics an integral part of routine healthcare without sacrificing people’s right to access information about themselves. Our goal is to remain the world’s trusted source of genetic information — not just for people with a doctor’s order, but for everyone regardless of why or how they choose to learn about their DNA. DNA is fascinating, but it’s even more fascinating when it’s about you.

    And the frontrunner in industry X begins to raise barriers to competition by working with regulators… This is not something to celebrate.

    (As Peter Thiel said, Paypal’s so valuable because with all the post-9/11 regulation, it’d be next to impossible to start another one.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • An interview with paleoanthropologist Chris Stringer:   I do find it curious that Chris used the term "creatures." This probably not intentional, or with serious conscious intent, but Neadertals and Denisovans are creatures I think the ethical issues are strongly mitigated. After all, chimpanzees are used in medical experiments. I assume that the woolly mammoth...
  • Ria says:

    #64, We are, after all, discussing cloning, so I’m not sure how discussing the feasibility of actually accomplishing the cloning fails to be “the main barrier”. If the process of cloning doesn’t work in primates (or with unacceptably low success rates, particularly given the cost of obtaining human oocytes) with current technology, the whole discussion is moot from a practical perspective (although an interesting thought project). Even if we had appropriate means to incorporate the mutations (which would be likely to much more than 20,000, by the way, as you aren’t just talking about nonsynonymous mutations that would be relevant, you’d need to include all of the noncoding changes (intergenic and intronic, as both are relevant) as well that may play a role in adjusting gene expression). Transgenic methods would then be relevant to exchange broader swaths of DNA, if we could get any of them to work reliably enough using ancient DNA, which is yet another issue. There would need to be incorporated markers (eGFP, for example), putative incorporation site mutations, etc, depending on the transgenic methodology that turned out to be viable in humans, which at this point is unknown, but likely to be retroviral-based. We know the transgenic methods that worked in marmosets and recently in rhesus macaques, but those same retroviral methods present a high probability for random insertion into the target genome….and there would need to be concomitant removal of the human DNA for the target ancient DNA region as well. None of this addresses the issue of genome duplications and genomic structure that may play a role in native Neanderthal development, but may be missing in humans (and would not have been detectable in the genome sequencing…they would have collapsed, as mate pair libraries cannot be constructed from ancient DNA to my knowledge…and fragment libraries are difficult to obtain structure information off of). Put simply, we just don’t know enough about the actual Neanderthal genome yet to try to reconstruct it, especially in the context of a cloned living individual. That’s why it’s called a “draft” genome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Jason. No need for cloning C-M. I played lacrosse. We’re already here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • These creatures lived in the past in their own environments, in their own social groups.

    That’s why we should clone not just one, but whole groups of Neanderthals. And then give them some living space in Alaska, where they can hunt moose, and nice, Jane Goodall-like ladies can study them.

    Then after a few generations we can clone some Cro-Mags and send them in and see what happens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • DK says:

    #59

    It’s not cloning that is a main barrier (although it is a formidable one). It’s that the replacement in the genome are done by homologous recombination – which isn’t very efficient in mammals and takes long time and low frequency to select for. So when the task is to make 20,000 mutations, the existing techniques cannot offer anything realistic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Urk. That should read:

    One never knows how the future will see things.Beliefs are not frozen in place.I can easily see the pendulum swinging the other way on sterilization in the future.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Nyk says:

    I would be concerned about the Neanderthal’s predisposition towards violence, which could pose a danger to society at large. A hunter-gatherer is quite likely to be more violent than a descendant of farmers and shepherds.

    A ‘vibrant’ community of violent Neanderthals living in the midst of weak, domesticated sapiens may be the last thing that is needed. I don’t even want to think about the accusations of racism coming from liberals, that only my fellow sapiens will have to endure, in spite of their physical weaknesses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Karl Zimmerman:”I’m aware of the history of sterilization during the “progressive” era, including in the U.S. That said, those days are behind us, and that type of eugenics is viewed with horror by even the majority of genetic determinists today.”

    One never knows how the future will see things.Beliefs are not frozen in frozen in place.I can easily see the pendulum swinging the other on sterilization in the future.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • So what do you do with a Neanderthal, once he or she has reached, say, six years old?

    Decades ago, Heinlein wrote a plausible short about a genetically modified chimp of a kind used for scut labor being legally declared a man. The court proceedings were frighteningly logical and, in today’s society, probably inevitable. After all, we’ve called him H. Neanderthal. See, “H”. Man. Hardly necessary to provide any more evidence.

    We are told that Neanderthals, at least the men, were probably more violent than H. Sap. The deduction has to do with finger-length ratios as proxies for testosterone levels. H. Neander are, according to anatomists’ assertions, hugely powerful, short, with short limbs. In judo and wrestling, short and stocky is a bitch to fight. How would things go on the playground?

    If he’s a “man”, you can’t keep him in a cage, even if the grant includes lifetime financial support.

    He’s not likely to be comfortable or competent in today’s society, it being designed by his successor after, say, forty thousand years, since he and his kind had two hundred thousand years or whatever it is and got more or less nowhere.

    If you clone the guy and then have to institutionalize him, that’s about as vile as can be. The supermax prisons drive prisoners mad due to confinement and isolation, yet they are necessary in some cases to protect the guards and other prisoners. And in this supposed case, what did he do wrong?

    Prisons are full of guys with overaggressive tendencies whose physical capacities allow them to do great damage to others. And so they have. Seems a bad idea to bring a sentient being into a situation where this is his likely end when we don’t have to.

    Other than some guys who are too salty about their ability with the test tubes and have no further thought, I can’t see a single reason for this.

    Morally reprehensible.

    And what for? A freak show?

    Richard Aubrey

    ReplyReply AllMove…InboxAOL_MailSaved_on_AOL

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Ria says:

    The practical aspects of primate cloning are very complicated. Non-human primate cloning has thus far not been very successful, and it has been tried, at least for macaques (published data on the extremely low success rates for somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), or cloning, in non-human primates–see Okahara-Narita, et al (2007)). Human cloning has apparently been even less successful, but I’ve read up much less on that topic. Primates are also remarkably resistant to the transgenic techniques that are commonly used in other mammalian animal model species. That’s not directly relevant, but it does speak to the fact that what works in mice (ie: transgenics, easy knock-outs/knock-ins, SCNT, etc) and other mammals may be much more challenging in primate species, and particularly in the ape lineage. The few non-human primates that have had success with SCNT and/or transgenics have been relatively removed from humans in the primate lineage (ie: marmosets with transgenic efforts, cynomologous macaques with NT related technologies, albeit at low success rates for both)…ie: they are not apes. I completely agree with comment #47. I don’t think that cloning humans will happen any time soon, and moving forward to try to clone an ancient extinct species is much farther. Another aspect to using complete gametes that I’d like to bring up is one that cell biologists would assert: not only the nucleosomal proteins involved in chromatin remodeling (which are arguably the most critical), but also the protein composition of the oocyte itself that would play a critical role in successful conception, and the transition from the oocyte-supplied resources to blastocyst-derived proteins. The composition of these proteins does differ between species. How important that is for successful development, however, would require a series of experiments that I doubt anyone would be willing to do using primate oocytes with other-species DNA (or primate DNA with alternative species oocytes) at this time. I’m curious if anyone knows if such experiments have already been done. I’m unaware of any.

    An argument can be made that Neanderthal and human are so close as to make no difference in this respect, but I think that’s an assumption that we don’t know enough to be able to make. There have been some significant population dynamic changes that have affected our genomes since Neanderthal and humans interbred (population-specific, of course), so I don’t know what effect those may have had upon the ability of a mostly Neanderthal genome to successfully develop from a human fertilized oocyte. It would depend in part on how successful the breeding efforts were originally between Neanderthal and human, I would think. Was it easy for cross-breeding to occur? The proportion of our genomes suggest that it may have been, but there are other explanations rather than ease of cross-breeding that could explain the proportion of Neanderthal genome that remains in the modern human genome.

    All of this doesn’t address the draft quality Neanderthal genome that we have available to work with at this time. I’d be leery of cloning any ancient species without more samples from which to compare and try to parse out the most complete picture of the genome. Svante Paabo did an amazing job, obviously, and the best job to date on ancient DNA, but there’s only so much that one can do with ancient DNA. The damage can cause some really significant problems in sequence interpretation, and there are some rather large gaps that could be very significant for the species. We also know very little about duplications, which can be a very significant issue, particularly relevant for GPCRs and thus sensory perception. If we did try to clone a Neanderthal at this point, we’d wind up merely with a hybrid that was a bit closer to what we THINK a Neanderthal is than we are, but that’s the best we could hope for, biologically.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I should have worded it better, I wasn’t advocating cloning neandertals infertile. I was wondering about what a future society that cloned neandertals would be thinking considering that moderns and neandertals have bred and are interfertile. If they didn’t want hybrids then they would clone them infertile.

    I’d like to think a cloned neandertal could live a life within the normal range of moderns, but there a number of circumstances in which they could be cloned, some good and some bad.

    All I’m certain of is that if a neandertal is cloned a modern will be having sex with one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I personally see no problem in cloning Neanderthals. Certainly we can’t resurrect their culture, but I wouldn’t see any point in doing so anyway. The Neanderthals were a species that could, we have to assume, stand separate of their culture of circa 35 000 BCE and survive like Homo sapiens can survive after having moved on from the culture of the Cro-Magnons.

    If we could resurrect the Neanderthals as a species through cloning, I think that we should do it and raise the clones as members of modern human society, instead of trying to force them to be relics. If there would be limits to their ability to be part of modern human society, then special arrangements should be made and perhaps eventually a new Neanderthal culture could emerge.

    Personally, I think that member of any species of the genus Homo would be legally human. The similarity with Homo sapiens would be too great to deny the status of humans to them. Australopithecines might be tricky, but not Neanderthals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If one created a series of individuals, with progressively more neandertal genes, at what point would they be considered non-human, if ever? What if each of the genes can be found in some living human?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • We Homo Sapians Sapians are terrible at sharing. When we showed up all the other groups of homids went away. Lets learn from history first before we kill them off a second time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Ben says:

    Would a Denisovan or a Neanderthal *legally* be a human being? Because if so, it’s hard to imagine a medical ethics board approving this (in the West, anyway).

    And if they’re not legally human, you’d have created an individual with a human (or almost human) capacity to suffer, but no rights. Which might actually be useful for certain evil military/slave labour applications… Imagine Neanderthal shock troops who can’t be tried for war crimes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • you could cut and paste those Denisovan mutations into a modern human genome

    No, you couldn’t. Few of them – sure. But not all of them. Not with the current technology or any technology envisioned today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #48: Tasmanians.

    I can easily imagine that once it become possible for parents to select which chromosomes a child will inherit (and more so when we can individually select genes) that some of the ‘mixed-race’ Tasmanians may possibly purposefully select the chromosomes with the most ‘Tasmanian’ admixture in them. I can imagine some similar decision-making happening in some American Indians from the United States.

    Other parents may want to make sure that their children are as as admixed as possible (as in the differences between the ancient mixed population in Central Asia (name?) and American Blacks) to ensure that they are a ‘true blend of their parent’s love!’, or perhaps that they inherit specific traits from each parent. And some parents will want their children to inherit the most unique genes that each of them have, which might lead to some interesting changes in gene frequencies.

    In any case, as long as the children grow up in loving homes the way that all children should, such tampering would certainly be ethical…..if for no other reason than that the parents are already making decisions about their child’s future just by the fact that they have a child – picking chromosomes or genes is merely fine-tuning.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #47, great comment! i’m less concerned about the paralogy issue than the chromatin. though from what i recall neandertals are 3 X as far from modern humans as khoisan are from other humans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • For some reason this reminds me of a short story by A. E. van Vogt.

    http://variety-sf.blogspot.ca/2008/03/e-van-vogt-monster-aka-resurrection.html

    Neanderthals with cat eyes will take over the world!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • More optimistically, what if Neandertals lacked social intelligence, but exhibited very strong aptitudes in the visuo-spatial sciences?

    So we’d have just gone and made us some more mathematicians and theoretical physicists?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Syon -

    I’m aware of the history of sterilization during the “progressive” era, including in the U.S. That said, those days are behind us, and that type of eugenics is viewed with horror by even the majority of genetic determinists today.

    In addition, the logic of the era was stupid regarding these matters, as Darwinian fitness merely means the number of viable children you can ensure reach adulthood. If the “feeble-minded” really did out-reproduce, then they were more fit.

    Similarly, I’m not sure how you could argue, in terms of genetics, a Neanderthal should be sterilized to prevent interbreeding. First, they already interbred with “us” once. Second, as Razib noted, the vast majority of their genome would be culled from the Neanderthal portions of our own DNA. I have a feeling this would need to be patched a bit with reconstructed fossil DNA as well – I can’t imagine that 100% of Neanderthal genes survived, when non-Africans only share around 2%-4% of their genes, and some appear to have been highly selected for. If the reconstructed Neanderthal’s genome combination was a selective advantage, I don’t see any reason why we should’t stop it spreading far and wide.

    Regardless, I presume muhr was arguing for special treatment of Neanderthals due to their “not being human” – and he wouldn’t advocate for sterilizing human beings. Attitudes like his are probably the best argument in these comments for why we shouldn’t resurrect the subspecies. I think it’s fine to create experimental humans through genetic engineering, provided it’s understood that, once they are born, they are humans with the same human rights as the rest of us, including the right to refuse to participate further study if they so wish.

    A related question to the skeptics. Consider Tasmanians. They were completely extinguished as a full-blooded people culture in the 19th century. Virtually nothing remains of their history, language or culture. However, a mixed-race community exists at least on Bass Island, and possibly on other nearby islands as well. It would be far easier to reconstruct the Tasmanian aborigines than Neanderthals, as the admixture is recent enough that most of the genome of the aboriginal ancestors is probably still in existence. Would this be ethical?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @45 – The cloning in use to date involves using entire intact gametes. These have not only the entire correct primary sequence, but the correct arrangement and number of duplicated genes, including the right number of active and inactive paralogous copies. Plus, the correct packaging of the chromatin to let the genes be accessed in the appropriate order. Early in this thread, folks are imagining editing a human primary sequence to match what we know about the Neanderthal primary sequence. We don’t know enough about Neanderthal paralogous copies to duplicate that, we don’t know how to do such wholesale editing, and we don’t know how to get the edited stuff back in it’s native packaging. — Early cloning efforts went through rampant defects, and miscarriages, and to add a whole genome edit to the front end will be returning to square one in terms of success rates. During early trials, lack of full success means defective births. — The info needed to make a creature is not in the sequence alone, and for the Neanderthal we only know the sequence of the simple, single-copy stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Karl Zimmerman:”Presuming that Neanderthals are self-aware and conscious (e.g., human beings) the idea of purposefully sterilizing them is abhorrent, and goes against basic international human rights laws.”

    It wasn’t so long ago that sterilization of the “unfit” was a respectable component of progressive thought; attitudes regarding basic rights are rather more plastic than people think.

    Syon

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Technically, this is farther off than a lot of people think. The early partial failures will be morally gruesome.

    can you say more?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Questions of morality about cloning Neanderthals will be mooted at some point, when some private lab simply does it. When staring at a live baby Neanderthal, crawling around in a diaper, nobody will look at the child and say “You shouldn’t exist.” It will happen in my lifetime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Technically, this is farther off than a lot of people think. The early partial failures will be morally gruesome. And with apparent success, what’s an error and what’s not won’t be clear.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @ Paul Rain makes a good point: “all members of Homo sapiens are adaptable to any environment or social group”. We would learn very little. I’m reminded of Marge Piercy’s novel *Body of Glass*. At the end, the heroine unexpectedly finds that she has the data she needs to recreate her android lover from scratch. But of course it wouldn’t be him, just a physical copy of him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • also, though i do think it is legit to argue that resurrecting neandertals is not ethical, it is instructive to note that many of the objections being made here (e.g., “oh so ugly!”) can apply to ‘normal’ modern humans. e.g., “that couple be 00glee, they shouldn’t breed and produce 00glee kids….” to me that doesn’t nullify the objection, but it strikes me that these aren’t qualitative issues with neandertals as such.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • re: cloning, this is going to be different than cloning. the problem with cloning from what i recall is that the cells are taking from the bodies of organisms which have already aged. this sort of project would involve the splicing together of SNPs at positions where we know neandertals and humans differed, using the reference genome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • While I would love to see this and I’m sure we would learn a lot, it would certainly suck to be the neandrethal herself. She would just want to be a normal kid, but all the time there would always be scientists and reporters looking for clues of her apishness. Every time she threw a tantrum or refused to clean her room, everyone would be like “yup, that’s the neandrethal in her!” If we did this, I would actually hope that plastic surgeons would do some early interventions to make at least her face look more familiar. That would be a kindness to her personally, and it would also be a kind of control that would allow for a more direct comparison between her and homo sapiens sapiens girls. (If she grows up looking “freaky”, we’ll never know what features of her behavior were caused by the fact that she noticed that people thought she looked freaky.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @ #26 gcochran

    I meant for my second paragraph to discuss how genetics effects disease susceptibility in modern humans, but I didn’t think I needed to lecture people on this blog on something so obvious. Your point is absolutely valid though, and I guess, on its own, my comment looks a little too simplistic. Sorry. My intent was to simply counter the idea that raising a Neanderthal would be completely analogous to Europeans meeting Amerindians. Certainly genetics matters, but as I noted in my comment, there’s reason to be skeptical that it would mean certain death for any cloned Neanderthal in the modern world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • 31 -

    Presuming that Neanderthals are self-aware and conscious (e.g., human beings) the idea of purposefully sterilizing them is abhorrent, and goes against basic international human rights laws.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • jb says:

    Cloned animals, at least with current technology, often show genetic abnormalities.

    We’ve been assuming here that any resurrected Neanderthals would be genetically healthy and truly representative of ancient Neanderthals, but it seems possible to me that we would end up producing creatures who looked like Neanderthals, and had many of their characteristics, but were subtly botched and messed up inside. The danger here is that doing a bad job of resurrection might be within our reach, while doing a good job isn’t, but that someone might go for it anyway, just because they can. That I think would be truly immoral!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A Neanderthal child who grew up eating Cheerios, cheeseburgers, pizza and such would possibly have not so much in common with a prehistoric “wild” Neanderthal. The different foods would doubtless cause many subtle changes in his bodily and chemical constitution. So for purposes of bringing these people back to see what they were like in ages past….well, maybe it wouldn’t be so straightforward.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I see a hollywood movie in the works. Thousands of years ago, homo sapiens fought and defeated the neandertals….in the 21st century, man brought them back and now….the rematch between man and neadertal…haha

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’ll just point out that the near global tendency is to move away from experiments on chimps that may cause them harm. The possibility of psychological harm to resurrected Denisovans, even if we tried to insure against that, would be swimming against the tide.

    OTOH, there’s also lots of philosophical literature debating the value of turning potential human life into actual life even if actual life might suck. I don’t know enough about it to draw conclusions, but it probably would be useful here for anyone who wants to get serious about this issue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I mean the neandertals should probably be cloned infertile.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I wonder how big of a psychological jolt it would be for an anatomically modern human to come into contact with a neandertal compared to say two different modern human populations coming into contact.

    Perhaps labeling the clone as a neandertal would be a big source of the jolt. No doubt when our ancestors came into contact with neandertals they noticed the difference, but I suspect they didn’t see each other as different forms since they bred after all.

    Unless we wanted to produce a whole new neandertal/AMH hybrid they should probably be bred infertile.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #27, there are still people who rank them as a species. And before you bring up the discovery of admixture, consider that coyotes (Canis latrans) and grey wolves (Canis lupus) are nearly always considered different species even though large populations of coyote have some grey wolf ancestry.

    The decision over whether to call them Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis is more about bookkeeping preference than about science. (For better or for worse, the ICZN is “agnostic” about taxonomic preference.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Perhaps if you could reliably deduce from their genes and theory that a cloned Neanderthal would be within the normal human range and not, say, aphasic, it would be okay. ”

    Well, there are aphasic humans already, so that would be within the actual human range. (Where the “normal” human range cuts off at is a little bit subjective.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’m not sure why people think that Neanderthals would stick out like a sore thumb. Yes, their facial type would be fairly unattractive (particularly women) to modern humans, but the more contemporary reconstructions make it clear they were not far enough from the human norm to be in the uncanny valley. Certainly they didn’t have those comical browridges like the Geico cavemen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • minor note: neandertals are sapiens. just not sapiens sapiens :-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “not because their genetics weren’t adapted to Old World diseases”

    Undoubtedly, they would have developed protective sickle cell trait if they’d just been exposed to malaria from birth. And G6Pd deficiency . etc. Hint: you’re wrong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Ed says:

    Would be pretty cool if there were Neanderthal super soldiers. I think a nation’s interests and sovereignty are better protected by stronger minds (rather than muscles) nowadays however. Developing faster and more sophisticated ballistic missiles and ABMs is what’s really going to bolster a nations military prowess. Once a nation’s a nuclear power, they join sort of a ‘clique of nuclear powers’.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos#BrahMos-2

    Also, do you guys think Neanderthals would be as quick and agile as Sapiens? I’d rather be a fast guy with a gun than a big guy with a gun. I would have no problem with resurrecting Neanderthals, I think it would be awesome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #23, there are some issues of immunity which probably aren’t simply due to early exposure (last i checked native americans are kind of depauperate on mhc variability). though your overall point is well taken. i’d still bet that unless we ‘fixed’ some genomic aspects there would be long term morbidity issues, common to non-ag folk. the lactose intolerance comment was pretty funny ;-) lactose intolerant ppl get digestive problems, they don’t explode :-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @19. Dwight E. Howell

    I think you’re a bit confused about immunity in this case. Native Americans died from disease en masse after 1492 not because their genetics weren’t adapted to Old World diseases, but because their immune systems were not allowed to adapt to those diseases in their early lives. Immune systems are adaptable within the life span of an organism — that’s what makes them so neat. Thus, any neanderthal raised in a modern environment would adapt to those diseases around it, just like a normal human child.

    Now, there may be genetic differences in their immune system such that they are more susceptible to certain diseases compared to us, but I simply do not know enough to about their genome to comment on that facet. How far outside of modern human variation are they really? Is 30,000 years of their extinction long enough such that they’d be too behind? Maybe, I don’t know. As Razib said in #17 though, this situation would be a quick fix anyways.

    As far as lactose intolerance goes… the majority of modern humans are lactose intolerant (which is a commonly discussed theme on this blog, by the way). And as long as we’re genetically engineering them, we could fix that too, if we cared to, although I don’t really see the point. Would the fact that they couldn’t drink as much milk as their peers be enough to refuse bringing them back? Some of these ‘ethical’ dilemmas seem a bit like fishing to me… (although I do think there is a serious ethical situation to consider here).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What’s the general consensus on Neanderthal IQ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Might I refer you to Asimov’s “The Ugly Little Boy” for a thought experiment on this idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    As far as I know, Islam religion says humans are created as is (adam and eve) and they claim we didn’t evolve from a more primitive organism. I’d *like* to see a living proof just for using it as an argument against believers of tales of creation. It could be fun!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I see absolutely no reason to think these people were less human than we are and could not acquire the needed social skills since they would start lives as babies on an even level with any new born.

    The real issue is that their immune systems wouldn’t stand a chance. Any time true primitives come in contact with moderns they normally die in large numbers plus our diets would almost certainly cause them to become diabetic and they would be lactose intolerant. A tolerance for alcohol would also most likely be absent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Mike Keesey: Of course that’d be fine- everyone knows all members of Homo sapiens are adaptable to any environment or social group that’s worthy of existence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • since their immune systems would not be primed for 30,000 years of pathogen evolution and adaptation.

    if we can splice in neandertal segments, wouldn’t be too hard to “keep” modern human immune regions, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’d imagine that Neanderthals would be extremely susceptible to alcoholism, but they probably wouldn’t need to worry about that, since their immune systems would not be primed for 30,000 years of pathogen evolution and adaptation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #14- Finch, I think of them as human with some physical and perhaps mental differences.

    The fact that they would look different would be enough to mean they could not live safely and seemlessly in our society. No matter how intelligent they are- they would always stand out, always be “the freak”. They would have to live seperate from our society- hopefully in something more than just a lab…

    … for their safety more than ours. I can’t think of many communities where they could live safely. Their life would constantly be threatened in open-society “to protect the children”. I can imagine more than a few religious groups would not tolerate their existance.

    Assuming scientists don’t get clone happy- there wouldn’t be enough of them to provide mutal protection and support in a society of their own…

    … and who knows- maybe they would be a threat to us…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • > Could a neandertal live a normal life? No, not in our society- and we certainly couldn’t
    > release them into “the wild”- they have no community with which to survive.

    That’s an empirical question and the answer’s not obvious. I take it you imagine them as slightly smarter apes. Perhaps if you could reliably deduce from their genes and theory that a cloned Neanderthal would be within the normal human range and not, say, aphasic, it would be okay. Separately, I think you would want assurances that the child would be raised in a family and not in a lab. It might be hard to get that.

    I note you (Bobby) added a reply a few minuted after I wrote this addressing some of these issues.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • #12, first thought: choose life! :-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I won’t delete my previous comment… but I would like to add a thought I had since I clicked submit 5 mins ago.

    Thinking about it- assuming Mr. Neandertal is “Human”.

    What if modern humanity were to perish by some disease (or other means) and long in the future some other intelligence had the ability to clone us.

    If they had the technology to do so- and meet our needs without causing us undue stress- even if it meant keeping us in some hospitable confinement for our protection… the irrational emotional side of me would hope they would bring our species back. Let us reproduce and establish ourselves again.

    Suspecting Neandertal were just like me, I would think they would want the same. So, perhaps, if we could truly meet their needs- and provide them a stimulating comfortable space- (not a prison- or a lab… but a home, companionship, and a meaning to life) and understand they are emotional- intelligent spaient beings… with their own desires and intelligence… perhaps…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.