Excellent reporting by @hannahdev on work by @hsu_steve
Could be done next year if someone were to seriously try, instead of all this useless fake ethics talk. In any serious ethics scheme, pursuing this technology relentlessly is mandatory.https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/may/24/ivf-couples-could-be-able-to-choose-the-smartest-embryo …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 2 more replies
-
-
-
Serious question: What criteria do they use now to select an embyo? (Assuming one is making a selection). Is it random selection? If so, is that ethical to randomly select?
-
Mostly they just look at the embryo in a microscope to see if it looks alright. When genetic testing is done, it's almost only for chromosome errors.
-
So it's "aesthetics"....unless testing is done. The most aesthetically, subjectively pleasing-to-the-eye embryo wins.
-
It's getting more sophisticated than that, including with machine learning of time lapse data (film of embryo as it grows), but yeah, in practice, it's mostly some people looking in a microscope and following a simple rating guideline. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001502821732040X …
-
I suppose, if we're choosing, I'm gonna go with intelligence rather than a US Medical Society Human Embryo Growth Card. I mean, if offered a choice between the two value systems. and all other things being equal.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Harden's gonna love this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.