quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

It is a meaningless effort and no chance of success because there is no indication that any one gene or any group of genes controls behaviour.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Not yet. But some are allowed based on fluid tests for trisomy and ultra sound for Down's Syndrome, bifurcated neural tubes, and other fetal pathologies, aren't they?

quote:

Perhaps, elective abortions based on gene testing is a step too far.

quote:

However, nowhere is that suggested.

quote:

The mutations at best would be recognised as markers for potential personality disorders that might "slam" all unfortunately nearby humanity.

quote:

There may then be the potential to develop effective prophylactic interventions. Wouldn't that be a benefit to the individual and to society?

quote:

Perhaps, elective abortions based on gene testing is a step too far.

Maybe. Giving others than the parents the right to decide this, though, certainly is.

quote:

Oxford's Julian Savulescu has suggested it.

"Responsible parenting", he calls it, along with "a moral obligation"; he's not the only one.

quote:

You could be guilty, so let's convict you?

Doesn't strike me as the way to go.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

It is a meaningless effort and no chance of success because there is no indication that any one gene or any group of genes controls behaviour.

Certain genes are known from statistics to be strongly correlated with certain behaviors, which is why a prominent ethicist has already said it would be immoral not to use genetic engineering to cull violence as a trait from humanity altogether. If you accept his premise, which you've done in other threads, he makes a strong case for it. Me, I don't accept the premise, so his case just looks like calling for true crimes against humanity to me.

For instance, the genes for monoamine oxidase enzyme type A are known to differentiate outcomes in children subject to neglect or abuse or somesuch (I can't recall, but if you're curious, search for posts by me with the word Maori in them, and it'll be the most recent one). Artificially selecting for the "right" subtype to cull the "wrong" one from the population makes every kind of sense if you're the sort to favor safety over liberty (or life over freedom).

I agree we know next to nothing, and don't think we should start contemplating eugenics.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

To be fair, they have to come out with all sorts of bullshit and promise the moon on a stick to get their research funding, don't they?

quote:

The fact is, when it comes to genetics, we are still in the stone age and are cleless as to what over 95% of genes are for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Actually no one knows certain behaviours are attributable to genes, that is an assumption based on lack of knowledge.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Actually no one knows certain behaviours are attributable to genes, that is an assumption based on lack of knowledge.

I never said we know certain behaviors to be causally attributable to specific genes.

What I said was, we know something about a few correlations.

Nice strawman, though.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

We know next to nothing, we have deduced which is a lot different than being able to predict, which is a lot short of know. I still stand by my original post that there is no chance about finding out anything from Lanza's behaviour from his DNA.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


Finding out anything from Lanza's behaviour is not quite the point in my estimation. The larger goal is to search for mutations that can be matched with other individuals that exhibit similar behaviour. We know that a Down's Syndrome child has trisomy of chromosome 21. A link between chromosome abnormality and mental characteristics is established. However the chromosome is a collection of genes and so a macro marker. What objection is there to serching the next layer down? There were Down's Syndrome children before the microscope was invented. There have been injurious behaviour syndromes before the human genome was mapped. What is the objection to pursuing genetic research in connection with mental syndrome? Genetics likely plays a role in the development of paranoid schizophrenia. Why not examine a possible contributing factor?I do not understand your objection to research.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Yes, but, *whew*. It's about genetics - it's not about guns. That's the main thing, eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Yes, but, *whew*. It's about genetics - it's not about guns. That's the main thing, eh?

yes, exactly.. it was his genes.. not that his mother was trying to put him in an institution that made him very angry and he went over the edge.. guess all those (frequently men) that murder their spouse for wanting a divorce have bad genes too... but no,.. its definately not about guns..

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

yes, exactly.. it was his genes.. not that his mother was trying to put him in an institution that made him very angry and he went over the edge.. guess all those (frequently men) that murder their spouse for wanting a divorce have bad genes too... but no,.. its definately not about guns..

quote:

Sorry Vincent but the whole idea of searching for mutant genes that control behaviour appears to be nonesene. Biologists are beginning to realise the idea of finding mutant genes to cure illnesses is no going to be that simple because genes appear to work in concert, not as individual triggers. There just doesn't seem to be an individual gene or group of genes which control behaviour and experience and environment can act as switches without leaving any marker.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

It was so bad I've blotted out most of my memory of it, to be honest. It was a time probe macguffin rather than DNA, then?

I cant remember either, but I know it was not DNA.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Sorry Vincent but the whole idea of searching for mutant genes that control behaviour appears to be nonesene. Biologists are beginning to realise the idea of finding mutant genes to cure illnesses is no going to be that simple because genes appear to work in concert, not as individual triggers. There just doesn't seem to be an individual gene or group of genes which control behaviour and experience and environment can act as switches without leaving any marker.

I never suggested looking for genes to cure illnesses. I suggested looking for genes as markers for behaviours. BIG freakin difference. Nor did I ever say it was going to be simple. I understand a wee bit about polygenes and epigenisus. But to imply that geneticists are giving up on this train of research is wrong. They have only just begun.

The study of the nervous system can be done at multiple levels, ranging from the molecular and cellular levels to the systems and cognitive levels. At the molecular level, the basic questions addressed in molecular neuroscience include the mechanisms by which neurons express and respond to molecular signals and how axons form complex connectivity patterns. At this level, tools from molecular biology and genetics are used to understand how neurons develop and how genetic changes affect biological functions. The morphology, molecular identity, and physiological characteristics of neurons and how they relate to different types of behavior are also of considerable interest.

quote:

Translate all that into plain English and it really says, we know nothing but are fumbling around in the dark at the moment and sort of makes looking at Lanza's genes pretty pointless considering. Until there is an understanding of how genetics governs or influences or prompts behaviour and without a series of controls for comparison, studying Lanza's genes is pretty pointless

quote:

No single gene determines a particular behavior. Behaviors are complex traits involving multiple genes that are affected by a variety of other factors. This fact often gets overlooked in media reports hyping scientific breakthroughs on gene function, and, unfortunately, this can be very misleading to the public.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Well, how can there be an understanding without research? Control groups and double blinds will follow in time . . when enough data is gathered to formulate questions and hypothoses.