The real GATTACA

[brad89]

How much information could really be determined from someones DNA? I saw GATTACA and wondered if such discrimination was possible. The genetically perfect people didn't seem to lack anything the faith births lacked, and besides life expectancy, what possible factors could go into employment through DNA testing?

[ecoli]

It's mostly a matter of pinpointing what genes do what. About 99% of genes are the same for human to human, so to find exactly what genes code for what traits, and how requires a lot of study and time.

[brad89]

Yeah, but DNA says nothing about how much dedication someone has, the personality of a person (at least as far as we know), and I don't understand what factors other than life expectancy can be determined through processes similar to GATTACA.

[Xyph]

Gattaca was silly, anti-progress propaganda.

[ecoli]

Yeah, but DNA says nothing about how much dedication someone has, the personality of a person (at least as far as we know), and I don't understand what factors other than life expectancy can be determined through processes similar to GATTACA.

 

 

The idea is that you might be able to find genetic defects in the genes, perhaps hat will reveal some abnormality that could render you unfit for the workplace in the future, which could affect who you are hired by. Genetics wold be used in addition to, not instead of, today's methods of choosing employees.

[Bignose]

This is a question that really should receive more attention. Look up the Eddy Curry situation with the basketball team the Chicago Bulls. Curry has a heart defect, and the Bulls wouldn't sign him to an expensive contract. The kicker is that many people have the same defect Curry does, go on to have long fruitful lives. In fact, most people who have the defect probably don't even know they have it, since it is rare that it presents itself.

 

It is a tough question -- do you pay someone several million dollars of a guaranteed contract when there is a significant chance he won't even be able to play? On the other hand, it is much more likely that he will be completely fine and by denying him it is akin to discrimination.

 

This question wasn't ever really answered since the Bulls traded him to the New York Knicks, but as technology explores more of these questions, they are going to come up more and more often.

[Kyle]

Gattaca was silly, anti-progress propaganda.

I disagree. Like any futuristic storyline that attempts social commentary, it was exaggerated. The point is not that our society will ever become the one portrayed in the movie. You can still see where some elements of it could manifest themselves in our future.

 

I'm not saying that Gattaca was some prophetic masterpiece, but it was a little more than propaganda.

[brad89]

I do agree with Kyle. It wasn't a warning that the future will indeed be that way, it was meant to be a movie. But the portrayal wasn't all too exagerated, or didn't seem like it to me. Say that this was a test of life insurance. Is it discriminating somebody to say that because they have a heart defect or oncogene that they aren't able to purchase insurance, or need a much higher rate? It is a possibility.

 

There was much exageration though. You couldn't base an ENTIRE application on somebody's DNA. And you couldn't learn all that much from someones DNA if you were able to screen it. That was the stuff that was just drama. But the scientific and moral point of view on things such as insurance of many sorts or certain jobs in astronomy and cosmology, for the least part, was true. You could tell whether they will have bad eyesight or are suseptible to certain pathogens and viruses.

 

How do people feel about things like this? If you were trying to buy insurance and couldn't because your DNA placed you in a high risk group, you would feel discriminated. However, you can't blame the insurance company. They have a responsibility to rate according to risk assessment. Who do you think is being unfairly treated?

[Mokele]

I'm not saying that Gattaca was some prophetic masterpiece, but it was a little more than propaganda.

 

Eh, I actually put it more in the "rip-off of Brave New World" category.

[ecoli]

Eh, I actually put it more in the "rip-off of Brave New World" category.

 

Hmm... I'm sure we've had the Gattaca is like/not like BNW disussion before. I still disagree with you

[brad89]

Huh. Never saw Brave New World, or heard of it for that matter.

 

Anyway, why would we get rid of genetic engineering just because some people feel discriminated. Gattaca was a movie. Not much more than that. It had a creative story that just happened to involve a potentially real science, but it was greatly exagerated. The stuff in it was way to dramatic, the real world wouldn't be that way. This rules out the anti-progress.

[Xyph]

Well, maybe it did have some truth to it. I admit I liked it, as a film, when I first watched it, anyway, but I just got the general impression that the message was "genetic engineering is bad."

 

Some parts of it leaned more towards this sort of message than others, though. Like the bit at the beginning, where the prospective parents are talking with that 'gengineer', and the mother is looking very unsure while he's telling her all the benefits this child will have. Why would anyone have a problem with that?

 

Admittedly, there might be some truth in the scenario the film presented, but those who do oppose progress like genetic engineering are often quick to cite Gattaca as support for their views, regardless of the intentions of the filmmakers, which I expect has influenced my feelings on it.

[ecoli]

Huh. Never saw Brave New World, or heard of it for that matter.

 

It's a novel by Aldous Hexley, but they probably made some crap film version of it in the 60's.

[Helix]

I just was reading that book earlier.

 

And to respond to the question: Nurture (your environment) controls who you are as well so it is useless to let Nature (genes) run everything. nature vs. nurture. I agree with Brad89, personality can't be understood from genes alone, and I doubt it ever will be.

 

And as an aside I think I am mentally disabled....I just realized Gattaca, on purpose, uses the base letters of DNA. I knew the film's plot and, obviously, ATCG but had never but 2 and 2 together. Learn something everyday.

 

You can tell about birth defects or physical traits. Brain size might be able to be gleaned. But like

[bascule]

It's a novel by Aldous Hexley, but they probably made some crap film version of it in the 60's.

 

Not to mention a HORRIBLE NBC version in the '90s

[Severian]

Eh, I actually put it more in the "rip-off of Brave New World" category.

 

I don't think that is fair. The themes were very different. In fact, John Savage's problems in Brave New World had nothing to do with his genetics.

 

I have no problem with screening for genetic disorders, but one should not make aesthetic judgements such as choosing the color of the the yes, shape of the nose etc.

 

(I have actually been genetically tested and have no known 'defects', not even recessive ones.)

[gcol]

(I have actually been genetically tested and have no known 'defects'' date=' not even recessive ones.)[/quote']

 

I had to laugh at that. The quips, rejoinders and ripostes that sprang into my mind were without number. Would be cruel and unkind to put any into print.