<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 2015-11-12 14:24, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAc1gFim4m3gXLJSc0jM2i1YHusb=pot2MG=sDs4WGMKaXDQKQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
The current hype about CRISPR gene editing is causing a
lot of<br>
discussion among the ethics thinkers.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>### I am an ethics thinker and I endorse CRISPER (if
done with proper liability insurance).</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Professional bioethicists are indeed debating the topic. See for
example this week's Nature,
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-a-path-through-the-thicket-1.18748">http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-a-path-through-the-thicket-1.18748</a>
which recounts some fairly moderate and sensible recommendations (I
know a few of the authors). The tricky part is not whether one
endorses the technology, but how one explains why a particular
application is a good one to the rest of society, funding bodies,
and legal professionals. It is not enough to have an opinion, one
needs to express it well too.<br>
<br>
Rafals original question: I roughly agree with the guess, but I put
a fairly broad confidence interval around the dates, especially late
dates. This is an application that like gene therapy could get
delayed by 15 years just by an early setback. <br>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Anders Sandberg
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Oxford University</pre>
</body>
</html>