I am a traditional Catholic. So sadly this is not possible for me but what do you think about freezing my 20 year old seed for the purpose of minimize mutational load?
How do they compute IQ scores? Existing IQ PGS in scientific publications come from much smaller samples than EA and therefere EA PGS predicts IQ better than IQ PGS.
Why select against T2D when Ozempic already exists?
Thanks a lot for the estimates. You mentioned it shortly of course, but I just want to stress the value of moderate, pro-health selection: Both socially and personally, healthcare costs are extremely easy to balloon. Fundamentally a healthy body works for very low cost, but dysfunction needs disproportionate money, often even to still work on a level below that of the healthy. Considering that this technology will be taken up in particular by people who already require IVF (since the jump at that point isn't very large anymore anyway), I expect this to save substantial money as well.
Just to be clear, that doesn't mean I'm against the IQ selection, only that the health selection should not be underestimated. And the average laymen is much less likely to be opposed to health than to IQ selection, too.
I still think the real revolution will need to be gene therapy on the sperm itself or gene therapy ok the ovaries and testes so that intercourse can produce superbabies. But even this present technology is worth the while, and I expect it to get better fast. With the pace of advancements, I wouldn't even be surprised if we can reliably raise by a standard deviation with the methods developed in five years.
A lot of trads whine about this but if we don’t do it the chinks will
I am a traditional Catholic. So sadly this is not possible for me but what do you think about freezing my 20 year old seed for the purpose of minimize mutational load?
How do they compute IQ scores? Existing IQ PGS in scientific publications come from much smaller samples than EA and therefere EA PGS predicts IQ better than IQ PGS.
Why select against T2D when Ozempic already exists?
Thanks a lot for the estimates. You mentioned it shortly of course, but I just want to stress the value of moderate, pro-health selection: Both socially and personally, healthcare costs are extremely easy to balloon. Fundamentally a healthy body works for very low cost, but dysfunction needs disproportionate money, often even to still work on a level below that of the healthy. Considering that this technology will be taken up in particular by people who already require IVF (since the jump at that point isn't very large anymore anyway), I expect this to save substantial money as well.
Just to be clear, that doesn't mean I'm against the IQ selection, only that the health selection should not be underestimated. And the average laymen is much less likely to be opposed to health than to IQ selection, too.
I still think the real revolution will need to be gene therapy on the sperm itself or gene therapy ok the ovaries and testes so that intercourse can produce superbabies. But even this present technology is worth the while, and I expect it to get better fast. With the pace of advancements, I wouldn't even be surprised if we can reliably raise by a standard deviation with the methods developed in five years.