SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A new mitochondrial donation technique called spindle nuclear transfer has been successfully used in order to prevent a child from inheriting a mitochondrial disorder:
It's not the first time scientists have created babies that have DNA from three people - that breakthrough began in the late 1990s - but it is an entirely new and significant method. [...] The US team, who travelled to Mexico to carry out the procedure because there are no laws there that prohibit it, used a method that takes all the vital DNA from the mother's egg plus healthy mitochondria from a donor egg to create a healthy new egg that can be fertilised with the father's sperm.
[...] Some have questioned whether we are only now hearing the success story while failed attempts could have gone unreported. Prof Alison Murdoch, part of the team at Newcastle University that has been at the forefront of three person IVF work in the UK, said: "The translation of mitochondrial donation to a clinical procedure is not a race but a goal to be achieved with caution to ensure both safety and reproducibility." Critics say the work is irresponsible. Dr David King from the pro-choice group Human Genetics Alert, said: "It is outrageous that they simply ignored the cautious approach of US regulators and went to Mexico, because they think they know better. Since when is a simplistic "to save lives is the ethical thing to do" a balanced medical ethics approach, especially when no lives were being saved?" Dr Zhang and his team say they will answer these questions when they presents[sic] their findings at a meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in October.
Also at The New York Times and NPR.
First live birth using human oocytes reconstituted by spindle nuclear transfer for mitochondrial DNA mutation causing Leigh syndrome (open, DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.004) (DX)
As far as I can tell, what you see in the above Fertility and Sterility paper is all that has been released.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by aristarchus on Thursday September 29 2016, @08:44AM
Before we get our panties all in a bunch, there are some rather basic ethical questions about intentional genetic characteristics. They are useful to someone, so we are dealing with a qui bono situation. Once upon a time, a couple had a child with a disease that needed a bone marrow transplant in order to cure it. Relatives and public outreach provided no compatible donor. The parents were advised that a sibling would be the best match. So, they got busy, as parents do, and a sibling was soon produced. After a decent interval, the bone marrow transplant was successfully carried out. Success, yes? But just imagine the dialogue between the siblings at some later date: "If it wasn't for me, you wouldn't be alive!" "Oh yeah, if it wasn't for me, you wouldn't exist!" See, relations between siblings is already fraught enough. No need to go injecting somatic cell elitism into the entire mix. Any time we create a life for a reason, it is not really a life. Think about it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 29 2016, @10:46AM
It's a human resource.
cui bono?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday September 29 2016, @11:39AM
Siblings will make each other cry at some point, no matter what the reason.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday September 29 2016, @01:01PM
Then are the only ones among us who are really alive the Oops! babies?
Washington DC delenda est.