Spanish researchers want to bar code embryos

[nawainwright]

Spanish Researchers Want to Tag Human Embryos With Bar Codes - FoxNews.com

In yet another ridiculous "leap forward" technologically, spanish researchers want to prevent the "psychologically and emotionally devastating" practice of mistakes made during invitro. They claim it won't affect the child, that the bar code is on the outside of the embryo, and that it will disappear.

I have real problems with the "tagging" of ANYONE at any stage of their development. It really is just a way to make people seem like numbers rather than people. Which is easier to swallow: 24938 is no longer useful and is ready for termination - or - Mary Smith is no longer useful and is ready for termination?

You can rfid tag your pets, your elderly, your children, your employees...and now you can bar code the unborn. Lovely.

 

[ATOMonkey]

My personal philosophy is that you don't have to idiot proof a process if you don't hire idiots in the first place.

Honestly, who mixes up invitro embryos?

 

[ghostinthewood]

Eh. I think its insanely creepy and unnecessary but a lot of babies do get mixed up. IDK about embryos though. I would think it would be easier to train people better or supervise them better though. Haha.

 

[geronimojoe85]

Honestly, who mixes up invitro embryos?

Apparently the Spanish.

 

[rjstew317]

Eh. I think its insanely creepy and unnecessary but a lot of babies do get mixed up. IDK about embryos though. I would think it would be easier to train people better or supervise them better though. Haha.

that's an erroneous statement, in fact, it is so rare that there no statistics or percentages attributable to it. don't get me wrong, IMO if it happens once then that is one to many times. as for embryos, why can't they just label the dish.

 

[ghostinthewood]

Actually its a very low percentage. I thought it was more.

Either way I still think this is silly and unnecessary. lol

 

[88GT]

It would be prudent to keep in mind that, like all things that impinge on liberties, the issue is NEVER the issue.

 

[rambone]

wow...

 

[mrjarrell]

I don't see what the upset is. They're working on making sure the silicone ID is shed on implantation. They haven't perfected it yet. If they do, and the number gets shed it will certainly help them in choosing the best embryos for implantation. Remember that these are just a few cells, not a fetus of any sort. Sounds like a good technique for sorting the embryos, just needs some more work.

 

[nawainwright]

I don't see what the upset is. They're working on making sure the silicone ID is shed on implantation. They haven't perfected it yet. If they do, and the number gets shed it will certainly help them in choosing the best embryos for implantation. Remember that these are just a few cells, not a fetus of any sort. Sounds like a good technique for sorting the embryos, just needs some more work.

To be fair, this is your belief. There are many people in this world who believe life begins at conception. And those people would take great exception to your perceived "callous" viewpoint of life.

 

[nawainwright]

It would be prudent to keep in mind that, like all things that impinge on liberties, the issue is NEVER the issue.

And this is the primary reason I posted the link. War's are won and lost 1 inch at a time. The process of desensitizing us is not a BANG one time and out. It's a slow methodical process that makes us view other people and/or our liberties as less and less important or relevant. I'm not here to argue abortion or stem cell research (though I assure you I have strong opinions), this is about one more effort to make us comfortable with a potential infringement on our persons in the name of "safety". When what really needs to happen is we need to realize that there are risks to life. If there are transgressions/mistakes they are to be dealt with when they occur. We cannot allow control in the name of comfort (though many will argue, we are well down that path).

 

[rambone]

When tax dollars fund it or when laws begin to require it, then it becomes a matter of public scrutiny (and outcry) and constitutionality.

Outside of that, people have the right to barcode their cells, tattoo a their SSN on their skin, and get a rfid chip implanted in their forehead, if that's something they are doing with private money and on an elective basis. I would obviously not do those things, but I also would not take away people's rights to do those things if they chose to. People in opposition can stir the public by initiating debate, boycotting those who partake in the process, etc.

With that, I will leave you with another bizarre picture of a microscopic barcode on an embryo.

 

[ATOMonkey]

When tax dollars fund it or when laws begin to require it, then it becomes a matter of public scrutiny (and outcry) and constitutionality.

Outside of that, people have the right to barcode their cells, tattoo a their SSN on their skin, and get a rfid chip implanted in their forehead, if that's something they are doing with private money and on an elective basis. I would obviously not do those things, but I also would not take away people's rights to do those things if they chose to. People in opposition can stir the public by initiating debate, boycotting those who partake in the process, etc.

With that, I will leave you with another bizarre picture of a microscopic barcode on an embryo.

IMO, the embryo has a unique genetic code, identical to neither the father nor the mother. It is unique even to the other embryos in the invitro petri dish. A singular genetic code has been created. If we can call a single celled bacterium with a unique genetic code life, why not an embryo?

The decision of barcoding, tatooing, or other permanent marking should be left to the owner of the cells, the embryo.

Until such time that the embryo is able to make it's own decision, we should leave them alone, since being left alone is a pillar of individual liberty. A label on the container should be sufficient.

Just one man's opinion.

 

[88GT]

IMO, the embryo has a unique genetic code, identical to neither the father nor the mother. It is unique even to the other embryos in the invitro petri dish. A singular genetic code has been created. If we can call a single celled bacterium with a unique genetic code life, why not an embryo?

The decision of barcoding, tatooing, or other permanent marking should be left to the owner of the cells, the embryo.

Until such time that the embryo is able to make it's own decision, we should leave them alone, since being left alone is a pillar of individual liberty. A label on the container should be sufficient.

Just one man's opinion.

He does have a point here. The uniqueness of the genetic code should be sufficient. Besides there's nothing inherently superior about adding an extra step of bureaucracy, even if it is done privately. There is just as much potential for mistakes and abuse with this method as with the current. It's not like a bar code couldn't be replicated, records doctored, etc. It doesn't actually solve the problem of the human component of the errors, which quite frankly, is the only relevant component anyway.

 

[jwdecour]

Just wondering if anyone here has went through this process of IVF? It is not a question of just labeling a dish so that you get your egg put back in. In some cases each individual embryo gets tested for chromosomal abnormalities and after the test results are back you have to know which one or two eggs will give you the best chance of a live birth. One round of IFV with genetic testing can cost 20,000 dollars so it is important to get the most viable embryo.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Just wondering if anyone here has went through this process of IVF? It is not a question of just labeling a dish so that you get your egg put back in. In some cases each individual embryo gets tested for chromosomal abnormalities and after the test results are back you have to know which one or two eggs will give you the best chance of a live birth. One round of IFV with genetic testing can cost 20,000 dollars so it is important to get the most viable embryo.

My philosophy on IVF aside...

What stops the IVF lab from just having one embryo per "container?"

Is it necessary to have multiple embryos per container that would necessitate the need to label each one individually?

 

[mrjarrell]

IMO, the embryo has a unique genetic code, identical to neither the father nor the mother. It is unique even to the other embryos in the invitro petri dish. A singular genetic code has been created. If we can call a single celled bacterium with a unique genetic code life, why not an embryo?

The decision of barcoding, tatooing, or other permanent marking should be left to the owner of the cells, the embryo.

Until such time that the embryo is able to make it's own decision, we should leave them alone, since being left alone is a pillar of individual liberty. A label on the container should be sufficient.

Just one man's opinion.

The problem with your take on this is that the article states explicitly that the tags will not be permanent. They will be shed during the implantation process. Plus, these embryos are property of the individuals undergoing the IVF process and marking them makes good sense, from a scientific, ethical and business standpoint. These non-permanent markings will insure that the prospective parents get not only the healthiest embryos, they will be assured that they get their embryos, not someone elses.

 

[jwdecour]

My philosophy on IVF aside...

What stops the IVF lab from just having one embryo per "container?"

Is it necessary to have multiple embryos per container that would necessitate the need to label each one individually?

More containers more space for storage more risk for missidentification more risk for lost containers. The tags do just that ie "label each one individually" but require no morespace where space is limited.

Just curious what is your philosophy on IVF?

 

[ATOMonkey]

I believe that life begins at conception. Therefore, I take issue with any life that is created without the explicit intention of carrying it all the way through to its inevitable outcome.

 

[88GT]

The problem with your take on this is that the article states explicitly that the tags will not be permanent. They will be shed during the implantation process. Plus, these embryos are property of the individuals undergoing the IVF process and marking them makes good sense, from a scientific, ethical and business standpoint. These non-permanent markings will insure that the prospective parents get not only the healthiest embryos, they will be assured that they get their embryos, not someone elses.

The problem with your take on this is that you assume the statements made regarding this technology to be factual, accurate, and so implemented. There is no guarantee such will be the case. And as I said above, it does not address the human error component, which IS the reasons errors are made in the first place. Some white-coat can still screw up if he doesn't pay attention to the identification tags. What then?