How different would enhanced children be?

[Carlos Danger]

I'm using quite a loose definition of "enhanced" here. Assuming we knew which genes coded for which traits and we used that knowledge to produce the child with the most desirable traits (i.e. the ones that will give the child the best start in life) how much "better" would the average child be if he were produced by A) Using PGS to choose between 5 embryos, B) Selecting the best sperm from millions and the best egg from, say, a dozen C) Choosing the best chromosomes from a bunch of sperm and eggs and sticking them together in such a way that you get an embryo (is this even possible/feasible?) D) Any other method you can think of.

 

Am I right in thinking that the average child created by A is likely to be in the top 20% of unenhanced children? I'm basically interested in what limiting factors come into play that stop f(X) from increasing linearly as X increases where f(X) is the desirability of the enhanced child's traits* and X is the number of: embryos in A, sperm and eggs in B and chromosomes in C. Does that make any sense? As you can probably tell, I'm not a scientist.

 

* Assuming we had some fixed metric to measure this obviously.

[CharonY]

This is very speculative and I will move it appropriately.

 

 

Assuming we had some fixed metric to measure this obviously

 

I think this is the crucial question and I am not sure whether we actually ever can. Is an enzyme variant with 2.5% higher activity better or worse? In biology things are heavily interconnected and changes that you may consider positive in one isolated network and condition can have detrimental on others. There are extremes where you can easily notice impairments. But on the other side of the spectrum it is far murkier.

In the end it all also depends on the environment. Certain allellic variations may be more beneficial when growing up and living under certain condition than in others.

[Carlos Danger]

This is very speculative and I will move it appropriately.

 

Thanks.

 

I think this is the crucial question and I am not sure whether we actually ever can. Is an enzyme variant with 2.5% higher activity better or worse? In biology things are heavily interconnected and changes that you may consider positive in one isolated network and condition can have detrimental on others. There are extremes where you can easily notice impairments. But on the other side of the spectrum it is far murkier.

In the end it all also depends on the environment. Certain allellic variations may be more beneficial when growing up and living under certain condition than in others.

 

By metric i just meant some scale like iq by which we could measure "how much" of a trait someone has. Suppose you had a few million genomes sequenced and statistics on each person such as iq, looks etc, could you not use statistical analysis to work out which genes/groups of genes correspond to each trait and use the results to work out the likely traits of an embryo? I didn't really understand your reply which probably means I didn't ask my question very well. If you produced children using methods A,B and C how much better would these children be (roughly) in terms of IQ score, 40 yard dash time, height, etc or is there just no way to tell?

 

This question stemmed from a podcast where they discussed using these methods briefly and it probably does a better job of explaining what i'm talking about than I have. Here's a link, it should start at the appropriate section (which is only 10 minutes long). http://bloggingheads.tv/videos/2438?in=24:58&out=37:37

[CharonY]

 

 

had a few million genomes sequenced and statistics on each person such as iq, looks etc, could you not use statistical analysis to work out which genes/groups of genes correspond to each trait and use the results to work out the likely traits of an embryo?

 

The idea is not bad however this has been tried out for easier traits (IQ is highly complicated in that regard) such as diseases. And it does not work out very well.

The reason is, as I mentioned that few traits can be strongly linked to a single gene or group of genes. Especially something like IQ will dependent on a large part on environmental queues. Think of it that way, even if there was a gene that influences IQ (and if there is, we do not know how it does it), if you raise the kid alone in a dark room it will likely perform far less well than an "average" kid with a more interactive upbringing.

 

I am also pretty sure that if you analyze the allelic variants between world-class sprinters and average people, you will find no genetic signature that explains that difference (and so on).

[Carlos Danger]

 

The idea is not bad however this has been tried out for easier traits (IQ is highly complicated in that regard) such as diseases. And it does not work out very well.

The reason is, as I mentioned that few traits can be strongly linked to a single gene or group of genes. Especially something like IQ will dependent on a large part on environmental queues. Think of it that way, even if there was a gene that influences IQ (and if there is, we do not know how it does it), if you raise the kid alone in a dark room it will likely perform far less well than an "average" kid with a more interactive upbringing.

 

I am also pretty sure that if you analyze the allelic variants between world-class sprinters and average people, you will find no genetic signature that explains that difference (and so on).

Sure. I have heard that it is estimated that intelligence is 50% inheritance and 50% upbringing . This might be a really stupid question but If the bottom part is true why do athletic traits run in families. I may be mis-remembering how alleles work i've only done biology up to a high school level and that was a while ago..

[EdEarl]

Is it possible for one person have the talents of Bo Jackson, Michaelangelo, and Galileo Galilei? Or, whomever you consider to be the most talented physically, artistically, and scientifically, without being limited to three exceptional talents.

 

Carlos, is my question also your question, or would you envision enhanced people as having specific superhuman talents.

[CharonY]

The thing is that it is almost impossible (at least with our current knowledge) to accurately deconvolute the influence of environment and genetics for all but the most simple traits.

For IQ the estimated values range wildly and also change with age. I.e. it appears that (contraintuitively maybe) at early age the measured heritability is low but increases with age (see Bouchard 2004; Curr Directions in Psychological Science).

 

 

From my perspective (which is biased towards molecular biology) a mechanistic link is needed, before we can be certain of the actual contribution. With regards to families, there is also a strong influence on environment for that. A family that values sport is more likely to be more active in that regard, for example. I am not saying that there is no genetic influence, as there certainly is, but there is no simple 1:1 attribution of a genetic trait with the physiological outcome. Many factors have to come together and especially at the top level time investment becomes more relevant. You will not become a world pianist just by having good genes (say, nimble fingers of sufficient length, good hearing etc.). You will always need an enormous amount of practice.

 

But as a thought experiment. let us assume that there are some genes that promote musicality and as a result one person needed less training to become good, and another one needs more. But both finally master the art. How would you look at their performance and quantify the contribution of their respective genes?

 

What is more likely to happen is that "designer" babies will end up with certain desirable physical traits (say, eye color) and absence of markers for certain genetic and maybe even reduced propensity for certain other diseases.

But do not expect the genes do the work for you. If you spoil the kids, they probably end up being lazy-ass couch potatoes (but who knows, maybe with lower risks of cardiac diseases).

Edited July 25, 2013 by CharonY