Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: The Embryo Factory: the Commercialization of Eugenics

  1. #21
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    The Horned God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, June 30th, 2017 @ 09:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Irish
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Ireland
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Posts
    2,248
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    8 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    On a subject as gravely serious as human life, you joke. I know now what sort of man you are.
    Oh for goodness sake! Your argument that a group of 100 cells is the same thing as a human being is the joke. An embryo is merely a DNA blueprint housed inside the cellular machinery of an egg and repeated 100 times or so; there is nothing more mysterious about it than that. It is structurally no different than the skin cells floating around in the air in peoples homes right now.To hold an object of that simplicity up, and claim the same rights for it as for an individual with a brain and a nervous system and hopes and dreams would be completely unjust.
    Close observation may result in feelings of horror, wonder and awe at world you find yourself inhabiting.

  2. #22
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Saturday, June 11th, 2016 @ 01:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    CM-Atlantidish
    Country
    England England
    State
    Lancashire Lancashire
    Location
    Mamvcivm
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    British
    Posts
    3,586
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts
    Can I ask that the endless debate end, please, before it descends again into adhominems?

    I'm sure there's a general abortion one elsewhere on the forum, but I doubt that anything new would be said there. I understand that the emotiveness makes it important for many to voice their absolute opposition to such measures, and they thus have a duty to speak out when the matter comes up, but a point is reached when it just gets repetitive with back and forth retorts that don't cover new ground. I would reply to SB's comments about those who only use the Thanks Button rather than reply in a post in the same vein; why add more if someone else has already said your opinion? That's exactly what the Thanks Feature is for.

    I'd close this thread if there weren't all sorts of more specific matters that could still be discussed e.g. which diseases would be more appropriate to terminate and so on. Keep posts limited to ones with actual factual content now, please!

  3. #23
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last Online
    Sunday, December 28th, 2008 @ 08:44 PM
    Ethnicity
    British
    Subrace
    sub-nordic
    Country
    England England
    Location
    London - Just Around
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Family
    Single
    Politics
    National Anarchist
    Religion
    Hatha Yoga
    Posts
    896
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    SouthernBoy.

    Are you suggesting that the non-implantation of diseased embryos is somehow worse than:

    • A short life of pain, suffering and/or dependency?


    • The natural and frequent failure of such embryos to survive to term because of miscarriage?


    These two outcomes are the consequences of the implantation of diseased embryos.

    All human life is not equal and the lives of moral relativists are particularly unequal, and moral relativism is what you, SouthernBoy, are displaying on this thread.

    Regarding the tricky arguments, I feel that I can speak from my own position:

    I am an autistic person and there is a lot of debate amongst autistic advocacy groups because genetic components relating to autism have been discovered leading to 'fears' that this will be used to eliminate these genetics from the gene pool, as the development of amniocentisis test for Down's syndrome led to a dramatic drop in number of children with Down's syndrome being born.

    *** WOTEVA ***

    It is clear that parents have the choice here. If I were to have children, I would be worried that they might suffer from severe autism. I am fairly fortunate only to be diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome and I may be doing ok now, but growing up was VERY hard for me and my parents.

    I think that this is a slightly grey area here, but what about the non-grey areas? What about kids born with no SKIN?

    In a similar fashion to how we will introduce capital punishment in the UK, we should deal with the worst cases first. Some human variations are, without doubt, terrible.

    Once we accept that disease is to be discouraged by eugenics, health will inevitably become the next focus.

    If I am to have children I want them to have the best chance in life.

    Furthermore is it any coincidence that one of the largest bodies to oppose prevention and intervention is the Catholic Church?

    A global body which, like most global bodies, and global BANKS, seeks to eliminate competition for its own benefit?

  4. #24
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Æmeric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Britain, Ulster, Germany, America
    Subrace
    Dalofaelid+Baltid/Borreby
    Y-DNA
    R-Z19
    mtDNA
    U5a2c
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Indiana Indiana
    Gender
    Age
    57
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Obama
    Religion
    Conservative Protestantism
    Posts
    6,271
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    573
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    522
    Thanked in
    229 Posts
    I'd like to know what are the 6,000 diseases that could be tested for? Are they very rare genetic disorders that might not even be worth the bother of testing for most persons? And how might the knowledge of "genetic predisposition" be used? There are some diseases that run in families, like diabetes or breast cancer. There is a gene that cause a predisposition for brest cancer. So in the future will the private insurance companies refuse to insure persons (genetic proned to certain diseases) who birth or maybe even conception, could have been prevented. It won't be too long in the distant future before genome mapping for every individual will become the norm & there are probably very few, if any, persons who are genetically perfect. This screening could be useful but if we are not careful it could be used to prevent the birth of potential asthma sufferers or persons who may turn out myopic.

    @ SouthernBoy: When someone thanks a post it usually means we agree with their statement. There is no need to post a "Me too!" post. That just clutterers up the thread. And besides you would just responded with the same argument, "Life begins at conception". We get it, you believe life begins at conception, that a 1-cell embryo is a human being.



    This is a 5-day old embryo



    This is a 6-week old fetus.

    There is a big difference. And pregnancy doesn't begin until the embryo is implanted in the uterus.
    Last edited by Æmeric; Friday, November 21st, 2008 at 07:21 PM. Reason: I'm forgeting my biology.:doh

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 @ 04:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Gender
    Posts
    2,606
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Forgive the tardiness of my response.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Horned God View Post
    Oh for goodness sake! Your argument that a group of 100 cells is the same thing as a human being is the joke. An embryo is merely a DNA blueprint housed inside the cellular machinery of an egg and repeated 100 times or so; there is nothing more mysterious about it than that. It is structurally no different than the skin cells floating around in the air in peoples homes right now.To hold an object of that simplicity up, and claim the same rights for it as for an individual with a brain and a nervous system and hopes and dreams would be completely unjust.
    When does life begin? When does a life deserve human rights?
    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post
    I'm sure there's a general abortion one elsewhere on the forum, but I doubt that anything new would be said there. I understand that the emotiveness makes it important for many to voice their absolute opposition to such measures, and they thus have a duty to speak out when the matter comes up, but a point is reached when it just gets repetitive with back and forth retorts that don't cover new ground.
    Novelty is rare. "Nothing is new under the sun," as they say. If we were not allowed to rehash old subjects, I fear we would have very little to talk about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post
    I would reply to SB's comments about those who only use the Thanks Button rather than reply in a post in the same vein; why add more if someone else has already said your opinion? That's exactly what the Thanks Feature is for.
    It skips the risk for the reward. In effect, it is all the people that give "Thanks" to a post to which I am replying to which I reply, but only one is held accountable for those words. There is something wrong with that.

    The "Thanks" feature should not be for the lazy and the cowardly who fear posting themselves and would rather "jump on the bandwagon" of a post with which they agree. Let reputation take that role.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post
    I'd close this thread if there weren't all sorts of more specific matters that could still be discussed e.g. which diseases would be more appropriate to terminate and so on.
    So we may discuss who to murder but not whether or not we should murder?
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    Are you suggesting that the non-implantation of diseased embryos is somehow worse than:

    • A short life of pain, suffering and/or dependency?


    • The natural and frequent failure of such embryos to survive to term because of miscarriage?
    These two outcomes are the consequences of the implantation of diseased embryos.
    If their nonimplantation results in death, yes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    All human life is not equal and the lives of moral relativists are particularly unequal, and moral relativism is what you, SouthernBoy, are displaying on this thread.
    All human life is not equal. All innocent human life deserves to live.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    Regarding the tricky arguments, I feel that I can speak from my own position...
    It was never my intent to "trick" anyone. If you discover a situtation with which reconciling your beliefs is "tricky," it may be time to rethink those beliefs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    I am an autistic person and there is a lot of debate amongst autistic advocacy groups because genetic components relating to autism have been discovered leading to 'fears' that this will be used to eliminate these genetics from the gene pool, as the development of amniocentisis test for Down's syndrome led to a dramatic drop in number of children with Down's syndrome being born.
    Would you rather have experienced the "pain" and "suffering" of living with your condition or to have never lived at all?

    Why is it some people insist on believing that killing a person "for their own good" without their consent is a good idea?
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    It is clear that parents have the choice here. If I were to have children, I would be worried that they might suffer from severe autism. I am fairly fortunate only to be diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome and I may be doing ok now, but growing up was VERY hard for me and my parents.
    I contend that as parents do not have the "choice" of murdering their children after their birth or even before their birth in some cases, they should never have that "choice." An innocent human being is the possession of no one. This "I brought you into this world and I can take you out" attitude has no place in civilized society.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    I think that this is a slightly grey area here, but what about the non-grey areas? What about kids born with no SKIN?
    Again, you or anyone should not have the "choice" of murdering them to prevent their suffering.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    In a similar fashion to how we will introduce capital punishment in the UK, we should deal with the worst cases first. Some human variations are, without doubt, terrible.
    None so "terrible" as to not deserve life.

    Find me the most horribly diseased person on this Earth and I guarantee you he has found atleast one thing about life worth living, who is anyone to say that he did not deserve that experience?
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    If I am to have children I want them to have the best chance in life.
    Can you see how murdering them because they are diseased or "inconvenient" is not the best way to do that?
    Quote Originally Posted by Fortis_in_Arduis View Post
    A global body which, like most global bodies, and global BANKS, seeks to eliminate competition for its own benefit?
    How surprising it is that the most competitive groups do not make excuses to murder their own progeny.
    Quote Originally Posted by Æmeric View Post
    This screening could be useful but if we are not careful it could be used to prevent the birth of potential asthma sufferers or persons who may turn out myopic.
    When you allow subjectivity in a subject as important as life, you open a "Pandora's box." Is my not wishing to do so so peculiar?
    Quote Originally Posted by Æmeric View Post
    When someone thanks a post it usually means we agree with their statement. There is no need to post a "Me too!" post. That just clutterers up the thread.
    There is no need to give "Thanks" to a post with which you agree. Those "I feel the same way!" and "Me too!" comments are best deserving of a reputation point.
    Quote Originally Posted by Æmeric View Post
    And besides you would just responded with the same argument, "Life begins at conception". We get it, you believe life begins at conception, that a 1-cell embryo is a human being.
    If you asked one hundred people how many grains of sand made up a "pile", it is not unlikely that you would get one hundred unique answers.

    Innocent human life is the most important thing in the Universe. To allow it to be governed by whim is a grievous mistake. Conception is the first point at which there exists a nonzero probability of life developing. To allow vacuous concepts like "viability" and "trimester" to mean the difference between life and death is an insult to the intelligence and humanity of any decent human being.
    Quote Originally Posted by Æmeric View Post
    There is a big difference. And pregnancy doesn't begin until the embryo is implanted in the uterus.
    Because I envision a day where gestation is not necessary for the development of life, I do not understand "pregnancy" and "life" to be synonymous.






  6. #26
    Spirit of the Reich
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Ahnenerbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Volksdeutscher
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Y-DNA
    I-M170
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    Gau Westmark
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Gemini
    Family
    Polyamory
    Occupation
    Herbalist
    Politics
    Ecological Geniocracy
    Religion
    Vedic
    Posts
    1,218
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    25
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    207
    Thanked in
    109 Posts

    IVF pregnancy from screened egg

    The world's first pregnancy using a new technique for screening eggs has been announced by a fertility clinic in Nottingham.

    Scientists have tested the eggs for abnormalities which cause IVF to fail. The team at the CARE Fertility clinic have found a way of extracting a "spare" set of chromosomes inside the egg and rapidly analysing them.

    They believe it has the potential to significantly improve couples' chances of having successful treatment. Perhaps the main reason why two out of three women fail at each attempt at IVF is due to chromosomal abnormalities in their eggs. There should be just 23 chromosomes in the egg which contain the woman's share of the genetic code - the other half come from the sperm after fertilisation.

    The spare chromosomes in the egg are found near its edge in what is known as the polar body.


    Sucked out


    The new technique is called array CGH (Comparative Genomic Hybridization). A laser cuts a hole in the edge of the egg and then, using a pipette, the polar body is sucked out. The chromosomes inside the polar body should be a mirror image of those left in the egg. So by analysing what is in the polar body, scientists can work out what is left behind in the egg, without disturbing it.

    If they find, for example, that there is a chromosome missing from the egg, then any subsequent embryo will fail, even though it looks healthy down the microscope. If they find an extra chromosome then it could lead to a miscarriage or a pregnancy with an inherited genetic disorder.


    US announcement


    Two years ago US scientists announced that 18 women had given birth after having their eggs screened with CGH, with another eight pregnant. But in those cases the subsequent embryos had to be frozen and re-implanted later, because the results of the screening took five days.

    A breakthrough with the array CGH technique is that the results come back within 24 hours so IVF can be done in the same cycle of treatment. It also removes the moral and religious objections some couples feel about creating and testing embryos which may be destroyed.

    The first woman in the world to be successfully treated wishes to remain anonymous. But the CARE clinic say she is 41, and had thirteen previous attempts at IVF and three miscarriages. She is now six months pregnant.


    Could benefit many


    Dr Simon Fishel, director of the CARE fertility group, believes it could help many more women. He said: "We know that at least half the eggs and embryos produced are wasted due to chromosomal abnormalities. "If we could chose those with normal chromosomes logic tells us we double the chances of pregnancy and that's what we hope."

    Dr Fishel also says that it could help reduce the number of twins and triplets associated with fertility treatment. "In this country we have to reduce the incidence of multiple pregnancy and there's a big drive to put a single embryo back. "That could reduce all women's chances of pregnancy but not if we choose the embryo that is most viable and has normal chromosomes.

    "Ultimately we could reach the holy grail of one cycle of IVF, one egg, one embryo and one baby."


    Many attempts


    Nicole Klieff would certainly welcome that. She underwent fertility treatment for nine years and spent £65,000. In that time she had six failed cycles of IVF and two miscarriages.

    On her seventh attempt, her daughter Lauren was born, who is now four years old. Nicole says it took a lot out of her, physically and emotionally. She said: "The only way I can describe it is as a roller-coaster ride. "Your emotions are up and down and you need to have a great amount of patience, endurance and mental strength to carry it through."

    Nicole has written a book about her experiences and says that for couples with fertility problems, any significant improvement in success rates would be tremendous. She said: "When you are infertile you want to find out why am I infertile and how long is this going on for and how much is it going to cost me or can I get the medical help that I wish to have."

    Around 35,000 women undergo IVF in the UK each year and just one in three cycles is successful.


    More work needed


    But it is far too early to know if array CGH is going to transform success rates. Stuart Lavery, a consultant gynaecologist and director of IVF at Hammersmith Hospital in London, said: "We need further research in this area so questions of reliability, efficacy and safety can be fully answered."

    That is likely to take some years. Tony Rutherford, chair of the British Fertility Society, described the research as exciting and promising - but also urged caution. He said: "The widespread use of this technology should await the outcome of such research to ensure we know which patients might benefit.

    "All too often we see ground-breaking news about techniques that seem to offer great hope, but fail to live up to expectations when applied in widespread clinical practice."


    Source: BBC


    See also: Family Building Through Egg and Sperm Donation, by Machelle M. Seibel, Susan L. Crockin

  7. #27
    Spirit of the Reich
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Ahnenerbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Volksdeutscher
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Y-DNA
    I-M170
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    Gau Westmark
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Gemini
    Family
    Polyamory
    Occupation
    Herbalist
    Politics
    Ecological Geniocracy
    Religion
    Vedic
    Posts
    1,218
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    25
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    207
    Thanked in
    109 Posts

    ‘Ivy League Egg Donor Wanted’

    Sound familiar? From the News to the New Haven Register, this and similar ads for egg donors have appeared in the pages of local newspapers, attempting to lure intelligent Yale women with sums ranging from $5,000 to $100,000.

    One Web site, offering $35,000 is looking for a “Genius Asian donor,” and describes the ideal match: “You should have or be working on a university degree from a world-class university, you should have high standardized test scores, and preferably have some outstanding achievements and awards.”

    Another, EliteDonors.com seeks a donor who is Caucasian, “very attractive,” “height 5’9” or taller” and “athletic.” The ad claims to offer $100,000 as minimum compensation.

    But there are egg-donation programs that focus on finding donors who are more interested in helping infertile women than in monetary compensation.

    Yale, for example, has its own anonymous egg donation program, called the Yale Oocyte Donation and Surrogacy Program, a subdivision of the Yale Fertility Center. The program compensates donors with $8,000, though administrators said donors are rarely motivated solely by money.

    Despite the altruism that largely motivates egg donors, varying levels of compensation and the nature of the matching process — which allows recipients to select the type of donor they want — have raised concerns about how closely egg donation resembles genetic engineering.

    Could fertility centers turn into factories for “perfect” children?


    Better Than Blood, Easier Than a Kidney


    The women who donate their eggs are primarily motivated by a desire to help others to conceive a child, Dorothy Greenfeld, the Yale program’s social worker, said, though the sum is often what first piques their interest when they see an ad in a newspaper or the Yale Calendar.

    “They think it’s better than giving blood but easier than giving a kidney,” Greenfeld said.

    Recent research from the American Society of Reproductive Medicine showed that almost 70 percent of egg donors across the country donated to help someone else have a family, while only 29 percent were motivated primarily by money.

    This characterization was supported by an examination of the profiles of anonymous donors at the Yale program — identified only by numbers, as confidentiality constraints prevented the News from speaking directly with donors or knowing their identities.

    Overwhelmingly, the donor profiles describe the women as active and outgoing, with at least some college education. There are social workers and MBA candidates; drama students and photographers. Some kayak for fun, while others enjoy cooking. They are Lithuanian and African-American, Italian and Asian.

    Some donors have had abortions and are looking for a way to “give back,” and others have family members or friends affected by infertility.

    Many even have young children and said they donated their eggs to give another woman the opportunity to experience motherhood.

    “I love my children immensely and couldn’t imagine not having them,” said one donor during the screening process. “I want to give a couple the opportunities to share the love and joy that I experience daily.”

    Others, like one social worker, said they were motivated by other aspects of their lives, like their jobs.

    ‘As a social worker, I have known many women that are unable to conceive,” she said. “This would be my way of contributing to them.”


    Being ‘matched’


    “Why do you want to donate?” is just of the many questions possible donors are asked during the long process of egg donation, Greenfeld said. The entire program can take anywhere from five weeks to forever for women who are never matched with a recipient.

    Interested women are first directed to Wendy Somers, the program coordinator, who does some prescreening to eliminate applicants who do not understand the procedure or who are not fully committed to donating their eggs. After the prescreening, prospective donors are mailed a screening form, in which they describe their family history and health history.

    Healthy donors who are not obese and have at least a high-school education are then called into the office to meet with Dr. Greenfeld for a psychological interview.

    “If a donor feels like she’s giving away a baby, we tell her not to,” Greenfeld said.

    Women also meet with Dr. Emre Seli, director of the program, who determines their risk factors, testing for problems such as sexually transmitted diseases or genetic disorders.

    If approved, donors must then wait to be “matched” with a recipient, which can take varying amounts of time.

    She meets with the recipient to discuss what they think is important in a donor. Criteria range from personality to ethnicity to level of education. One of the most popular criteria is physical similarity. Many recipients — who range from single women to married couples to gay couples using a surrogate mother — want a donor who looks like them, Greenfeld said.

    Seli said the most important criteria for recipients is that the donor has had a child or has caused a pregnancy with a past donation — both of which are evidence of their donor’s fertility.


    How it Works


    Once a donor and recipient — who never meet or receive identifying information about the other — are matched, the medical process begins. A trial hormonal cycle is administered first, and if both parties react favorably, the real cycle begins.

    The menstrual cycles of the donor and recipient must be matched, so they both receive Lupron, a hormone suppressant, Seli said. When the donor is in a state of low hormones, she is given FSH, a hormone that stimulates ovarian follicles, while the recipient is given estrogen to stimulate the uterine lining to prepare itself for embryo implantation. The final medication, hCG, is administered when the donor’s follicle is considered mature, and thirty-six hours later, the 15 to 20 ripe eggs are retrieved using a needle and a vaginal ultrasound probe.

    Seli said the eggs are placed in a Petri dish with the sperm provided by the couple and allowed to fertilize. The embryos are then observed under the microscope, he said, and after three to five days, about two are implanted in the recipient’s uterus.

    There is a 60 percent chance of at least one of the implanted embryos resulting in a live birth, Seli said.

    Seli said there are few health risks associated with egg donation. The chance of bleeding is slight and Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome — which is induced by the hormone medications and causes bloating — has a risk of less than 5 percent.

    Contrary to popular belief, egg donation does not affect the future fertility of donors, Hugh Taylor, Yale director of Reproductive Endocrinology, agreed.

    “People ask if we’re depleting their eggs, or if they will have fertility problems down the road,” Taylor said. “But there are a certain number of eggs that grow every month, and if they’re not ovulated, they die off. We’re just stimulating those eggs to continue to develop.”

    When hormones are administered to the donor, the only eggs that respond are the ones currently in development, Seli said. Dormant eggs are unresponsive to the medications, indicating that the treatments likely do not affect them, he said.


    Engineering Perfect Children?


    Greenfeld said she is uncomfortable with classifieds that raise questions about genetic engineering by advertising for specific, restrictive searches and large sums of money. And society at large, she said, often has similar concerns even about programs that are less choosy and offer less compensation.

    The American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommends that egg-donation programs and agencies compensate donors — because, as Seli and Greenfeld said, women in countries that do not compensate donate less frequently. But ASRM guidelines recommend that programs not provide compensation of more than $10,000. The majority of official egg donation agencies offer compensation between $5,000 and $8,000.

    “I have a real problem with the fact that Ivy League young women are really getting inundated with requests from these agencies,” Greenfeld said. “I don’t think it’s good for anybody. I don’t think it’s good for recipients to think that the most important characteristic an egg donor should have is that she’s an Ivy League student.”

    Seli, though, said that while the Yale program adheres to ASRM guidelines, it does not bother him when other agencies do not. He said his philosophy is to do his job without a moral or judgmental attitude, and instead to simply follow what is considered ethical by societal standards.

    Both Greenfeld and Seli say they have never received criticism about the egg donor matching process accusing it of genetic engineering, and they rarely work with patients who seem to be trying to engineer a child.

    “Occasionally, though, we get a couple who requests a donor who looks nothing like the recipient,” Greenfeld said. “And that makes me a little uncomfortable. That to me feels a little more like engineering.

    But Greenfeld said that while some patients come armed with laundry lists of ideal traits and others arrive unprepared, most fall somewhere in between, requesting only basic physical resemblance. Many, she said, even find the matching part of the process unnerving and feel that it seems too much like engineering a “perfect” child.


    What Lies Ahead


    The future of egg donation, both at Yale and around the world, may move in several directions, doctors said.

    Egg-freezing technology is still in development, Seli said, and may eventually become so improved that egg banks — equivalent to sperm banks — could be established, eliminating the matching and synchronizing processes. Oocytes could be frozen in batches, he suggested, and then thawed whenever a recipient wants the type of donor who provided them.

    Currently, Seli said, Yale offers the egg-freezing technology to women who want to freeze their own eggs to use in the future.

    Taylor suggested that improved stem cell technology might even eliminate egg donors altogether. Scientists could induce a stem cell containing genetic material from a patient’s somatic cells and induce to become or produce an oocyte, he said.

    But would this be a positive development?

    Perhaps not, for the donors who found it an “honor” to donate their eggs and choose to return as many as six times — the maximum allowed by the program.

    The Yale Oocyte Donation and Surrogacy Program is one of many anonymous egg donation programs in America, though many patients opt to use directed donors — donors they know or have chosen themselves — or agencies, which recruit donors and sometimes allow recipients and donors to meet.

    The program was established in 1989 as part of the Yale Fertility Center, which already had an in vitro fertilization program.


    Source: Yale Daily News

  8. #28
    Senior Member rainman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 28th, 2010 @ 06:34 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Scotch-Irish, Welsh, English, Dutch, German, French
    Subrace
    Alpine-Nordic mix
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Ohio Ohio
    Location
    ohio
    Gender
    Family
    Single, looking
    Politics
    Libertarian/Tribalist
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    Seems like an enormous waste of money. Couldn't you have your sibling or some relative have a child for you that you can adopt if you want to raise a child so badly? If the woman is infertile why not find some woman who can get pregnant the old fashion way by the husband. Or vice versa. Why spend a million bucks on bribing people and having surgeries etc.?

  9. #29
    Spirit of the Reich
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Ahnenerbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Volksdeutscher
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Y-DNA
    I-M170
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Location
    Gau Westmark
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Gemini
    Family
    Polyamory
    Occupation
    Herbalist
    Politics
    Ecological Geniocracy
    Religion
    Vedic
    Posts
    1,218
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    25
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    207
    Thanked in
    109 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rainman View Post
    If the woman is infertile why not find some woman who can get pregnant the old fashion way by the husband. Or vice versa. Why spend a million bucks on bribing people and having surgeries etc.?
    The old fashion way doesn't give you much choice. You just can't bypass the limitations of your own genetics. Even if you were totally dedicated to your bloodline's improvement, it would have to be as striclty followed by your children and grandchildren as well to show significant results.

    So, if you're perfectly happy with your sub-race, health, body type, etc, that's fine. But if you're not, or if you want to give your children the best gift: a sound gene pool, the new genetic technologies make everything possible.

    It is especially interesting from our racialist point of view, because that means any racial or sub-racial kinds of improvements are now in reach, and can be coupled with embryo IQ, sex and health-screening. In other words, the master race is in our hands; you just have to be able to afford it financially and go through the whole medical process, which is comprised of many steps.

    On the other hand, such dreams projects are not sustainable and a waste of time and energy, and those implicated in them must realize it:

    Organized Voluntary Isolation

    German neo-Nazis prepare to breed Aryans

    But it can be a nice complement to Pioneer Little Europe Communities



  10. #30
    Senior Member Stimme's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Tuesday, May 31st, 2011 @ 07:22 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    240
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Since this Embryo Factory is no brand new invention, I assume there are numerous babies who already have aged far enough to show first signs of superiority - are there any known cases?
    If there is scientific proof those artificial Übermenschen surpassed current humanity - then there would be no need to preserve the Germanics anymore. There would be no need to preserve any race anymore.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Stunning Color Pictures of the V2 Rocket Factory at Mittelwerk-Dora (Kohnstein)!
    By Ahnenerbe in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Monday, June 13th, 2016, 02:14 AM
  2. Interracial Embryo Mix-Up
    By svartabrandr in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Wednesday, September 15th, 2004, 09:06 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •