He Jiankui and the World's First Gene-edited Babies 

Ccr5 gene is also linked with improving cognitive functions.This might have been a way to try this out.

@@annablabka8653 It's also linked with a risk of developing influenza, west nile, certain forms of encephalitis

Fr I'm trying to understand why something that would help so many people is penalized

@@Mia-ek1jp the matrix wants to keep us down and take all our money through hospitals that's why

@@Mia-ek1jp generally because he didn’t actually address an unmet medical need. The science is so new to be throwing this on to vulnerable parents that had no other option for having a biological child without a risk of infection. You can look up the likelihood of a child being born with HIV when the father has it. The risk virtually disappears just from IVF sperm washing, which he did as part of this process, knowing that alone would nearly eliminate the risk. The problem is at the time and possibly still today is china limited IVF therapy. In my position, the scientist acted horribly irresponsibly in using new unproven biological technology (at best) to attempt to solve a legal problem. Rather than work with legal professionals and medical scientists to change policy or develop programs to allow them to gain access, he did this. At worst he played with the emotions of many voluntarily infertile couples and permanently altered the genetic material of their children, not caring about the risks, for the sake of his own reputation.

@@azurestarlight more like live in santized bubbles to be observed forever

It worked, and both kids are healthy and well as of December 2021, the experiment is a big success

​@@EC-hf8ui rill?

@@silegend not exactly. Search MIT review and the researchers name. That site was really good about tracking what happened and immediately after he made the announcement they ran through a list of what the genetic edits actually looked like and he missed a lot. The doctor, after being released from prison, of course claims the twin girls are healthy, however when asked about the third child created, he says notably less. I wouldn’t believe much of anything this man claims as the Chinese court that sentenced him found he fabricated the ethical review approving his study and the ethical review of his informed consent paperwork which all research participants signed. It’s exceptionally irresponsible to do genetic editing or a third parent baby situation with females as they pass their genetic changes down to the next generation, changing genetics in the population. Most of the recommendations from scientists I’ve seen say it should only be done for a male child for that reason, because we just don’t know the impact of changing our genetics. We do not yet know the risk. However we do know that the gene he edited likely puts individuals at a heightened risk for west Nile virus and a lower immunity for the flu.

@Guyver Francis Explain, please.

@Guyver Francis explain

we do not yet know the consequences of the mutations

So he cured all diseases?

He had major ethical lapses in this study and we don’t know that it actually worked. Beyond that, The kids were at little to no risk of contracting HIV through their father with washed sperm from the IVF treatment alone. He did genetic editing on children to solve a medical problem that had virtually zero chance of happening & didn’t edit all the genes he meant to in an attempt to make them hiv resistant. Also, his informed consent form and procedures were terrible. The form is available online. Look at it yourself. This was irresponsible.

Around the same time a scientist was lined up and had paperwork ready for approval to genetically edit the embryos of five different deaf couples children so that their children would not be born deaf. However I’ve seen that in the opposite scenario where couples specifically want their child to be deaf or to have their disability. We’re getting into a very strange place

Also the standard for quite a few countries is that you CAN do editing to embryos but it cant go beyond day 14 of development. Dr. H went well past that point & implanted them into 2 women which resulted in 3 births which is illegal just about everywhere that regulates it.

😂😂😂😂👍 great slap

There are 3 traits thats run in my family: Diabetes, Heart ploblems and Cancer. Those diseases make many of my family to have a miserable life and ultimately to lose a long batle with those diseases. If someone like Dr. Jiankui can make those genes out of my life so at least my childre and great grandchildred may have a more healthy and prolonged life I would glady accept.

You should take a minute to look up some of the criticisms on it. He lied about a good portion of what he was doing and took some really questionable stances in working with the parents

Because it’s not white

Exactly, you dont understand because youre not a part of the scientific community and you lack the correct education to have a understanding of it.

Because they are afraid.

RoarOfDamnation he is our savour

an update he is only getting 3 year of jail time

@@Methyll "He only got", he'll be home this Christmas.

He could edit my gene and make my weewee bigger

Evolution is natural. This is not evolution.

@@elias_xp95So what else than Evolution is this ? This is meant to be by nature. Keep going

@@benjaminblumchen9224 No this is the product of man made things. That's like saying a car is natural 😂

@Ψ No. But apparently many are linguistically challenged.

@Ψ I haven't insulted anyone, if you feel insulted by my words then you have not understood them which only further proves the point I was making.

he didnt discover shit lmao

@@chouwachan maybe didn't discover but did it first

If it's used only to eradicate diseases that's fine. But humans won't stop at that. And that's the reason why the majority disapprove. Because they are simply scared of its potential.

@@lydiakebbal2584 So would you say it was a fault to research atomic powers for example just because we could kill all of humanity with it?

@@lydiakebbal2584 I know that.. I don't disagree with u. But, almost every medical discovery or technological advancements comes with areas or fields where it may be used for wrong things. What should we do then? Stop doing them? How would that go?

@@benistingray6097 I will add something here. The study of atomic power was done by researchers way before it was used for anything that's been done that associated a bad rep to the term 'atomic' or 'nuclear'. They were research which are still being done just in the field of different areas like alternate source of energy using nuclear reactor to put less stress on natural resources. We could not have come here as a civilization without those researches. It's some of us, who always keep finding ways to do something horrible(like killing millions from atomic bombs or use of lethal gas during Kremlin war(I guess)) with it. But, these researches do play very important role in our understanding and we need people like him who take their research and put to noble causes.

@@subhamdas8860 Was just an example, as you said in your earlier comment, every new, or old for that matter, technology can be missused.

If China would’ve changed their policy of restricting access IVF, the sperm washing alone, which this man did as part of his procedure, would’ve virtually eliminated the chance that the children were born with the virus anyways. Governmental regulations caused a group of people to feel this vulnerable that they fell prey to someone using unproven technology on their children. There’s tons of ethical review material out there by medical and research ethicists that explain in great detail various things he did wrong. They very easily could end up making children that are severely ill beyond what they would’ve been.

is it worth the growing pains of a new technology? what if CRISPR changed something else unintended and then the kids die? Was their death worth it for perhaps something that wouldn't have happened if we waited 7 years?

You know the guy lied to the parents saying their babies would be vaccinated against HIV and then proceeded to genetically modify them without their and the government permission right?

@@luffydobrasil1758 It's tricky, many invention happened in an unethical settings. Even Churchill and Roosevelt are more unethical womanizer, alcoholic than Hitler. Ronald Ross, inventor of Malaria medicine did so by infecting some Indians with Malaria. So, sometimes there is a price to pay for any invention.

Ethical guidelines needed this technology is double edged

@@debajyotisaha8250 Gene editing is nowhere near proven to be safe on humans. In fact there's a risk that these children could end up developing severe abnormalities later in life. Would you let them do this experiment on your child?

He is not playing god. He is playing Satan the devil to destroy the human race

Yeah, am all aboard gen edition on humans, the problem was that he broke protocol and did it without assessing all the possible risk endangering the kids, which we still don't know how will grow up after this intervention. With that said, i like the guy for forcibly pushing the field by making a precedent on it, we are no longer at a theoretical phase thanks to his recklessness.

Yes. Last time the effort to cure disease through gene modification failed and killed the patient in 1999. Gene modifications really took a hit from that. The intention was good but we need to be really careful about human experiments. A failure may lead to decrease of funding for further research and other things.

@@Doomroar you have to realize that genetic alteration isn't going to be perfected unless tested he could test it on a mouse but the issue is that it's hard to get mouse embryos without killing the embryo

@@yoholup19 Then we have to explore ways to make getting mouse embryos more easy, that or we will just keep playing Russian roulette with somebody's kid (which may also be an alternative if everybody gets on the same page knowing that if shit happens it happens).

@@jayhe7874 this happened because the gene editing crispr cas9 wasnt discover yet and it was way too inaccurate.

Designing children is not ethical for both society and different people of group. But getting rid of diseases that plague humanity is okay. That's why I agree with the actions that this men did .

the only difference is the "natural" human turns into an outcast and seen as a dog to the society of designer babies.

You mean you should not prevent AIDS?

home arrest w/ special treatment. ccp definitely learning the trade asap as it gears up for resource wars!

@@tgmtf5963 You too

Maybe your live is pointless but bot everyone else

Thank you, Ninja Adachi, very cool!

I never seen you or talked to you, could you be a bot? Seems like you're a hoax tbh.

@@isaacsechslingloff9894bro you didn't have to go so hard on him

@@shrodingerscat8940 harder was needed

It's China. They will make super-soldiers without empathy or personality ready to die in droves for the CCP.

@@elias_xp95 i was more worried about only the rich being able to pay for perfect genes that prevent all diseases, cos its seems more realistic than controlling which gene makes your brain emotionless...

@@elias_xp95 DNA alteration of thinking is impossible but they can be bred with superhuman strength and be educated.

@@deusexmachina8112 You don't need to edit DNA to remove a persons empathy. You just need to indoctrinate them.

If he was an American then nobody would criticize him

To you, that is.

There is no such thing as evil or good

Evil and good is subjective this is actually a good act in my opinion because through genetic alteration a child can be born with the immunities of all possible viruses even more

@Jimmy Le everybody is perfect. With or without a great DNA GOD LOVES EVERYBODY

Weirdo

@@ellemaatje go tell that to a third world low class citizen born with mental and physical disabilities. And while at it. Try and explain to him why HELL EXISTS.