Same-sex couples could both be biological parents to their babies with new genet

[scramer]

This is great news. Would be interested to learn more.

[JACK777]

This sounds amazing but I guess it would have to be cost effective as well if people really wanted this.

[SoulsRevenge]

While this is great news to anyone gays or straight. My honest opinion on this is I wouldn't jump on it. Just because we are able to convert cells to sperm/egg cells, does not mean that there won't be any issues. However, chances are it won't be my lifetime before a full research is done on how the children are though. Plus, I'll rather adopt, there's enough kids in this planet.

[wcordeiro]

omg this so amazing

[wedge]

Looks far-fetched and unethical to me.

[spam17]

Several news publications have lost their collective minds over the years at the idea that men could be made ‘obsolete’ in the reproductive process by this possibility.

Despite their overblown fears – and unfortunately, considering the fantastic potential for this to make biological babies of lesbian couples a reality – experiments are still ongoing.

[vaylon 0]

I and mine had our sons by a similar technique almost 30 years ago.
Besides being highly unethical at the time it was forbidden by international law.
But, having worked with some ingenious and really special people, we made it happen twice.
One son looks like me and the other looks like him. One dark and one white.
They share the same fraternal DNA between both but have separate maternal DNA.
I use to joke with them about being born in a Petrie dish.

Although this was new to most people, my family has been doing this stuff for decades now. But in more natural ways. The men in the family would marry a woman who would be a good mother, but many of the children were born of women of certain characteristics to enhance the man's natural characteristics in a male child (intellect, physical abilities) The old eugenics style of creation.
growing up I always thought it was strange that on my Dad's side of the family, nobody gave birth to girls. I didn't find out until a couple of years ago why that was. Digging thru my grandparent's documents I found lots of evidence that abortions and adoptions were done on all female children.

Regardless, I am glad to see the world starting to get a better grip on natural selection.

[wedge]

Far-fetched, unethical, untested, massive speculation at best. So many things wrong with it. Even if one leaves ethics out at the door, there has been no such experiments in animals yet, AFAIK.

[spam17]

@vaylon:

I and mine had our sons by a similar technique almost 30 years ago.
Besides being highly unethical at the time it was forbidden by international law.
But, having worked with some ingenious and really special people, we made it happen twice.
One son looks like me and the other looks like him. One dark and one white.
They share the same fraternal DNA between both but have separate maternal DNA.
I use to joke with them about being born in a Petrie dish.

Although this was new to most people, my family has been doing this stuff for decades now. But in more natural ways. The men in the family would marry a woman who would be a good mother, but many of the children were born of women of certain characteristics to enhance the man's natural characteristics in a male child (intellect, physical abilities) The old eugenics style of creation.
growing up I always thought it was strange that on my Dad's side of the family, nobody gave birth to girls. I didn't find out until a couple of years ago why that was. Digging thru my grandparent's documents I found lots of evidence that abortions and adoptions were done on all female children.

Regardless, I am glad to see the world starting to get a better grip on natural selection.

Does the world really start getting a better grip on natural selection?

[monty]

I do not fear the science behind this at all. I would consider doing something like this if the option were available today.