Posted on 07/17/2025 11:19:19 AM PDT by BenLurkin
The method, pioneered by UK scientists, combines the egg and sperm from a mum and dad with a second egg from a donor woman.
Children born through the three-person technique inherit most of their DNA, their genetic blueprint, from their parents, but also get a tiny amount, about 0.1%, from the second woman. This is a change that is passed down the generations.
About one in 5,000 babies are born with mitochondrial disease. The team in Newcastle anticipate there is demand for 20 to 30 babies born through the three-person method each year.
Some parents have faced the agony of having multiple children die from these diseases.
Mitochondria are passed down only from mother to child. So this pioneering fertility technique uses both parents and a woman who donates her healthy mitochondria.
The science was developed more than a decade ago at Newcastle University and the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and a specialist service opened within the NHS in 2017.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.com ...
![]() |
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Worst idea I ever heard. Defying nature never works out.
If I had some horrible genetic disease that I could pass onto my children, I wouldn't have children. Period.
To think that this will "solve" a problem is ego. It could create a much worse situation.
To argue kids should be experimented on because of polio vaccines in the past is a twisted leap in logic. At that rate, why not bring back human sacrifice and bloodletting? AND, it was Simian DNA in some of those vaccines that screwed up recipients. That DNA was found in tumors decades after the children had gotten those vaccines.
Children are not meant to be experiments, regardless of what Godless scientists proclaim.
This "Save the Children" propaganda is how they sell bio-engineering.
So they claim but we've heard their claims before.
This is not going to end well.
That's a false comparison.
A blood transfusion or an organ transplant are given to a person whose DNA has already been established.
This is not an experiment on a ‘kid’. The kid doesn’t exist until the end of the process, and it has already given children a chance at a healthy life.
And sometimes people might not know for sure if their child will or will not be born with a genetic disease. They only know there’s a chance.
In the future, genetic engineering is predicted to treat cancer, cystic fibrosis, multiple dystrophy and a host of other diseases. It will be a long time before we can truly know the long term effects if any; but I doubt many people suffering from those will refuse treatment for themselves or their children.
Honor thy father and thy mother, thy sperm donor and thy egg donor and thy mDNA donor, and thy surrogate mother
Know for sure?
If they're going in and modifying DNA, they're betting the child would have been born with a genetic disease.
If you're betting against your own DNA, or your spouse's DNA, don't have kids and gamble with their life nor their offspring's either.
And they don’t sin! We sinned in the crration already!
We beat God!
How can you be sure you won’t have children? Every ‘method’ except total abstinence has had its failures.
Predicted.
I still don't have my jet pack.
that’s riceist!
Well, in utero genetic therapy has already been done and successfully in some cases. But I guess your concept that DNA is sacrosanct would reject that too, even if it saves a child from suffering...
“Every ‘method’ except total abstinence has had its failures.”
Mary would not call hers a failure.
I don’t think that requires a response, given the context of the thread.
Yup. G-d made us this way. Don’t try another.
Are they able to target the mitochondrial DNA that precisely?
Yep.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.