With what “side” effects?
Is this the first human trial, or just the first officially sanctioned one?
IIRC there was that one guy who experimented on himself and cured his lactose intolerance.
… found it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3FcbFqSoQY
Nearly 8 years ago.
I feel obligated to mention that he doesn’t modify his own genes, he infects himself with a modified bacteria that produces lactase.
First-in-human just means it’s the first time that specific therapy is being tested on humans instead of animals (e.g. mice, dogs, monkeys), and the primary objective of the trial is to test that it’s safe for use in humans. It doesn’t refer to the concept of gene editing or lowering cholesterol.
Thought emporium?
Yep thought emporium.
But I think the Chinese scientist that experimented on babies did it few years before that even.looks like same year, 2018, and thought emporium published first by 8 monthsThat paper is a wild read
Bring it on!!!
Autoimmune disease? GONE!
Acne? GONE!
Don’t like your eye color? CHANGE IT!
For rich by rich, only rich get.
Thats not really true.
The US is an exception but generally, the cost of therapies becomes commercially viable with the passage of time.
For example, our 2 year old daughter just had her DNA profiled because she has a few manageable, yet ongoing developmental deficiencies. Her DNA markers will guide her treatment.
When I was a child this type of treatment was sci-fi, and when it was invented you could have said “by rich for rich” or whatever.
Cost and price are two different things. Insulin is cheap to make but people die from not being able to afford the sticker price.
The US is an exception
… In the US, yes
Not outside the US
Shit’s going to get pretty weird imo. Hopefully it isn’t used for eugenics purposes (it probably will be, let’s be honest). I don’t think that people should be able to change so many things that they become unrecognizable, but I can understand changing a few things per person, voluntarily, obviously.
I believe in bodily autonomy. People should be able to do whatever they want to their own body.
Allowed, sure, just don’t think it’s a good idea to completely change who you are. I want humans to be recognizable as such. I’m more worried about what parents will be doing to their children, that’s where the eugenics shit becomes a problem. Getting rid of “undesirable” traits and whatnot.
Some people are way too attached to their disabilities.
Would you prefer that autistics and those with down syndrome cease to exist?
How do you feel about NIPT tests and ultrasounds?
-edit-
I’ll give a real answer in spite of your strawman.
Of course not. I believe every single person’s value is innate to their being, not derived from their ability, shape or productivity. Everyone deserves respect (until their actions say otherwise) and equality.
There is nothing about me that makes me better than someone who is neuro divergent or differently abled. However I’m also well aware of the severe physical and emotional challenges that things like severe autism or downs syndrome can cause for both the individual and their families, even when ignoring the additional challenges caused by discrimination from society at large.
Perhaps a really shitty question you should ask yourself is if you could go back in time and choose to be born with downs syndrome, would you?
If not then why? If not, isn’t it slightly hypocritical that you believe others, without their consent, should be?
There are a lot more problems in trying to create the infrastructure to enforce sanctioned uses of any readily accessible technology than there is in the use of said tool. The people who want to do the most harm inevitability wind up in the oversight position, while society tends to create enforcement mechanisms at a social, interpersonal level organically already.
WDYM “for eugenics purposes”?
Watch gattacca
Look up designer babies.
That’s not really “eugenics” as I understand the term but whatever.
And enjoy the 5 cancers you just caused yourself by editing other genes that happen to contain the targeted sequence !
Don’t want to stop being cruel and violent? Want to keep committing atrocity against vulnerable individuals while destroying human-supporting environments on Earth, for absolutely no practical benefit to yourself? Well good news! Investor-driven medical research is here to protect you (and only you) from the consequences of your monstrous choices!
What are you talking about?
Why would you lower cholesterol?
The body literally makes it because you need it. People with high cholesterol live longer…
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11901585/
Youd wanna lower arterial plaque so cholesterol doesnt get stuck?
An arterial calcium scan is the best indicator for heart disease etc.
Not cholesterol.
I have high cholesterol. I can send you some if you want. Promise it will make you live longer, it says so on this lemmy comment…
Is it butter or olive oil? I want to taste good when I die
The body literally makes it because you need it
For what?
People with high cholesterol live longer…
I don’t think that’s really a conclusive study. It only focuses on people who are already 80 or older and ignores the majority of people who suffer from cardiovascular issues that don’t make it to their eighties because of it.
From this study you could also conclude that people who have a natural resistance to high cholesterol live longer.
Youd wanna lower arterial plaque so cholesterol doesnt get stuck?
Plaque forms when cholesterol lodges to the walls of arteries. This happens at a greater rate when you have more lower density cholesterol in your blood.
An arterial calcium scan is the best indicator for heart disease etc. Not cholesterol
But calcium buildups are formed from clacified plaque, which is made from cholesterol…
If all forms of high cholesterol were really beneficial Americans would modern day Methuselahs.
for what?
You might not need cholesterol. But that’s what brains are made out of.
Lol, so your claim is that people with excessive cholesterol levels require it because they are making more brain…?
No is claiming you shouldn’t have any cholesterol in your blood, just that there isn’t reason to have an elevated amount.
If your body actually needed the excess lipids being produced it wouldn’t be saturated in the blood, it would be getting used.
This is where cognitive dissonance takes people. He’s less interested in his theory’s predictive power than he is in its ability to distract him from reality.
Your body makes shit, too. Don’t eat shit, dummy. That isn’t reason enough to conclude it is safe to eat.
I didn’t say to eat the cholesterol. Eating cholesterol isn’t the primary driver of blood cholesterol levels. Saturated fats are.
Maybe yours, but…
No dude, you’re WAAAAAAY overstating what that paper says.
I’m sorry to inform you that you have fallen for online propaganda. Cholesterol definitely is bad for you.
Our results challenge the common view that longevity is invariably associated with low cholesterol levels.
While single study like this is far from conclusive, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that a diet of mostly minimally processed plant oils and animal fats would result in better longevity than the typical Western diet comprised mostly of the “hateful 8”.
You need to reach out to the scientists to let them know! You could save lives with your insight!
