this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2025
39 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

2484 readers
286 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.

Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @[email protected].

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
39
Technology for lab-grown eggs or sperm on brink of viability, UK fertility watchdog finds (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Exclusive: In-vitro gametes are viewed as the holy grail of fertility research

all 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (3 children)

"Mass-producing eggs and sperm in a laboratory in order to have a baby with yourself or three other people in a “multiplex” parenting arrangement might sound like the plot of a dystopian novel.

But these startling scenarios are under consideration by the UK’s fertility watchdog, which has concluded that the technology could be on the brink of viability."

That's weird

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

I guess the answer is in the next line:

“Bolstered by Silicon Valley investment“

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's certainly different. I was going to say unique, but that would be incorrect.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Idk about dystopian

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Synthetic humans and the augment wars - here we come!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Filthy Tanks

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This honestly sounds really interesting for same-sex families. I hope this technology works out sooner rather than later. It would be really nice to potentially have a fully biological family like straight couples :)

(And it might eventually be way less expensive than adopting donor eggs/sperm)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Would lesbians be able to have boys if both gave their material? Women only have X sex chromosomes and men have both X and Y, so if I'm not mistaken two (or more) lesbians wouldn't be able to conceive boys.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Sounds correct to me. Females are XX, so neither parent would have the Y that's necessary to make an XY male.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I honestly have no idea. Interesting to think about, though.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Hey, anybody ever read "Brave New World"?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Does anyone know if having a baby with yourself carries the same genetic risks as breeding with first cousins?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Good question. I thought it would be more like having a clone of yourself, but maybe that's the same issue? Copy of a copy?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, copy of the copy is probably a bad idea.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You’re not wrong, but the technology is coming.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

The child would just be a genetic clone of the parent. There would be no change in genetic risks.