[ExI] The hits just keep on coming

Dan TheBookMan danust2012 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 20:27:55 UTC 2019

On Feb 26, 2019, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:34 AM Dan TheBookMan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Feb 22, 2019, at 11:13 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Any bio-Singularity would take 20 years to come into
>>> effect, more than enough time for others to verify and copy what
>>> works.
>> That depends on the bio-Singularity scenario. With altering CCR5 before birth, my guess is you’re right. But what about altering it and genes afterwards? For instance, let’s say said genes really did boost intelligence or other factors (self-control, for instance) to such a large degree as to make huge numbers of people cognitively superior (to their non-altered contemporaries or in the universal case to their former selves) within the span of a few years or a few months. (Pure speculation on my part. I don’t know how quickly altering genes in children or adults would lead to markedly improved cognitive outcomes.)
> As someone who has studied this...  ;)
> The short and only mostly accurate version is, most genes matter when
> you are growing up, and mostly stop mattering by the time your body
> (brain included) has been constructed - that is, reached its adult
> form.  Past that, they get passed to kids to inform their bodies how
> to assemble themselves.  What genes still matter when you are an adult
> tend to have more to do with maintaining the body (preventing or
> enabling the decay associated with old age, for instance) than
> building it.
> Which means tweaking your kids' genes (or yours, for the sole purpose
> of making kids with said tweaked genes) is possible, but changing
> yourself by genetic therapy, not so much.  There are exceptions, but
> radical enhancements are relatively unlikely.  Altering existing adult
> humans is far more easily done through surgery (and adjustments of
> chemicals, such as hormones).  There are many ways to accomplish said
> surgery (such as nanotech), but genetic alteration is generally not
> one of them.

Naturally, I meant genes that aren’t solely limited to development here. If Wikipedia is to be trusted here*, it seems like CCR5 is active after development, so there’s that. Even if it’s not, then there others, surely, that might tweaked. And, if that’s so and these can have a big impact in short order, then there’s room for some sort of bio-Singularity.


   Sample my Kindle books at:

* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCR5
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20190226/6153df21/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list