Talk:Human genetic engineering
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the WikiProject on Medical genetics, which gives a central approach to Medical genetics and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Human genetic engineering, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
Why were all of the body modification explanations taken out. You've made this entire article about gene modification without once mentioning what possible changes could be introduced. People reading it who haven't read much sci-fi or literature work will understand that there is a general process that engineers go through.
Let me put it another way, we've written an article about engineering, and we've explained to the reader about the draft board and that an engineer can make a change, while leaving out most if not all insights into what kind of changes could be made in the design of people. So far you guys have lost the point of this article, which is not just to talk about how the engineering is done, but also about what kind of changes could be made. -- fieryfaith.
Contents |
[edit] Minor Change
Ok, I guess I should say something about it. I've made a slight change to the claim that germline engineering is "deemed inappropriate by most scientists." There is no reference to support this claim. The reference that does appear at the end of the article makes a considerably weaker claim: that it is not appropriate at present due largely to the unreliability of today's methods. If you want to claim that scientists don't find germline engineering appropriate at all, please at least give a citation that makes claims to that effect. Xezlec 16:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Process
The section titled, "The Process" should be rewritten in a third-person non-imperative point-of-view. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Modernhiawatha (talk • contribs) .
[edit] Genetic engineering in fiction
There may be overlap with the article Genetic engineering in fiction. (SEWilco 05:54, 29 May 2005 (UTC))
- With the examples listed, yes. Some non-fictional examples are needed.
-
- Since genetic engineering of humans is generally off limits for various reasons, most literature on that subject may be fictional. Still, a lot of fictional literature (especially more recent literature) can be valuable for people wishing to get a grasp on a subject which may be rather opaque to the uninitiated. EthanL 10:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I've added a reference to James Blish's The Seedling Stars. I think that a reference should also be added to Nancy Kress's work. There is a great deal to be added about the real-world ethics and politics, e.g. transhumanist views, bio-conservative views, etc. Metamagician3000 00:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure why we talk about "spiritual considerations". The issue raised is a metaphysical one about determinism versus free will that seems to have little to do with spirituality as such. I take it that the spiritual realm is a realm that transcends both body and mind, as in Hindu philosophy. Nothing like that is mentioned here, though there is a reference to the "soul". Metamagician3000 00:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
--Someone should consider putting in references about A Brave New World By Aldous Huxely- its entire plot and storylines revolves around the concepts of using genetic engineering and human conditioning to create a perfect society.--
Why does the blurb for When the Wind Blows read like it was copy-and-pasted from a book review? On another note, it would be nice if someone would add Maximum Ride to the list (it's loosely based on When the Wind Blows, and by the same author).
- The entire list should be moved to Genetic engineering in fiction; that's what it's there for. Noclevername 06:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] refactoring
Someone put the {{refactoring}} tag on the article 29 April 2005. I took that tag off today. Don't take that the wrong way -- I certainly want to encourage refactoring on this and other articles. --DavidCary 10:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Alvin the Great?
There is some reference to something called "alvin the great" in the positives section and a part of the preceding sentence is either very poorly written, or perhaps minor vandalism. I am inclined to remove it but I wanted to ask incase "Alvin the Great" is legitamatly related.
It's vandalism, dude.
[edit] Expert needed
I added the "expert" template tag today. I'm no expert myself, but there has been a great deal of work on this topic by professional bioethicists, and I think this article could benefit from it.
- I added a narrative under 'social consideration' to offer a broader discussion of some of the possible social implications. --Oobasogie 22:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)oobasogie 15:17, 8 Aug 2006
-
- I added a section under "Human Enhancement" to help balance out the analysis a bit. Oobasogie 22:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I've removed the seciton on positive reasoning and chimeras to streamline the information presented in the article. I"ve also removed the "significance" section since it is a bit speculative and its most important parts are presented in the "considerations" portion of the article. I've moved up the "process" and "when to make chnages" sections of the article to improve the flow of information. I've also tried to clean up the "process" section. Oobasogie 00:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I cleaned up some of the prose in the opening paragraphs and removed the section on "Interference from Law" because it is no longer accurate. See http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-he-genetherapy28aug28,1,4998228.story?ctrack=1&cset=trueOobasogie 19:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Metaphysical considerations
I think the subsection metaphysical considerations should be removed. Neuroscience and psychology are the areas of science dealing with personality, not human genetic engineering. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.241.127.122 (talk • contribs) .
