By "promoted this technology" I think you mean talk to friends and family about it. Whenever I mentioned PGT-P to people of child bearing age they are interested.
The best political hope for the technology is that it stays under everyones radar until enough people have done it that its impossible to stop.
I predict one will find first adoption outside of the West. I suspect China will be first because of less moral scruples and more wealth. If they don’t keep it some sort of State “secret”, then the very entrepreneurial Chinese will of course offer such clinical services for all who can afford it. Designer babies might only be an airfare away. :-)
This of course will cause an even greater disparity among the people, i.e., the rich get smarter and the poor get dumber. Even if we made it widely available in say, the USA, we’d probably have a disparity among the races since this family “planning” especially requires some low time preference proclivities.
Isn’t the problem here that high IQ actually causes low fecundity? As I understand it, intelligent people prioritise education and careers, so even if they want a family, they end up having few children later in life. By contrast, stupid people haven’t the sense to use birth control properly, and don’t have anything better to do anyway, so they have more children. Supposing we used technology to make everyone more intelligent, wouldn’t everyone just have fewer children, causing TFR to drop?
More brainwashing. Skipping the liberal-arts brainwashing until age 35 and having a loving family is BAD BAD BAD. Only stupid people do that! MUST KILL BABIES. MUST ELIMINATE BIRTHS. Can't you see that you are sucking up propaganda from a class of individuals that DESPISE the masses and revel in watching you kill your own children?! Literally sacrificing them at the altar of elitism. Shame.
It's opportunity cost. Time spent raising kids is time you don't spend on work and hobbies, and this cost is higher for those who can obtain lucrative careers and afford fun stuff like travel, especially for women who do the majority of the childrearing work.
That's the problem. High IQ people tend to have fewer kids. This correlates with income until income reaches $500K I believe. Beyond that the wife stops working and they'll have 3-5 kids. Elon Musk is the canonical example. He has 10 kids.
There has to be more pro-natalist people at the right tail.
People don‘t even know about IQ decline in alt-right spheres, how do you expect the general public to notice and care. Libtards are fundamentally against eugenics aswell as most religious/conservatives. People with low IQ also dislike messing with human life. The longer we wait the harder it gets to develop such technology. It‘s over, it never began. Move to poland if you want to contribute to humanity
I don't think most people will do it for meta-social reasons like IQ decline. They'll just want Little Johnny to be stronger and smarter than the Jones's kids. Watch the start of Gattaca for how it'll work. (And watch the rest of Gattaca because it's a great movie.)
WHAT A SURPRISE! My comment noting how sick and evil it is to presume to be able to choose who lives and die has VANISHED. The elitists like Emil are amoralists with god-complexes. Anyone who isn't triggered by this article has already been brainwashed by the satanic elite who want nothing more than to take the place of God, who they presume they have hoodwinked you into disavowing. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
False; You prove yourself to be hypnotised by their lies. An embryo is a completed human being- it just isn't very large yet. But it is undeniably a unique human life. This article is evidence of the god-despising elites trying to roll out the technology and persuade you that child-sacrifice is a lovely option. It's such a gorgeous deception isn't it? A two-for one for the evil-doers. The fact that it didn't happen prior to now is not proof that the elite don't want it, surely your debate skills must be better than that! Neither is it proof that they aren't already using this technology for their own progeny.
In addition to using GWAS, we can just eliminate rare alleles (which are much more likely to have extremely bad effects than frequent alleles, which is why they are rare in the first place)
I honestly had no idea there would ever be a way to produce offspring using the genetics of same sex parents, let alone a single parent. As a gay guy who's been thinking about having children since I was myself a child, this greatly excites me. Being quite libertarian and having a relatively robust conscience, I trust myself to use such technology in a productive and responsible manner. Plus I know my talent for math, physics, and music (somewhat) bodes well for any children I have while also making it likely I'll be able to afford using such technology and raising a large family.
I've got a few questions for you Emil:
1. Is there any reason why heritability of cognitive qualities would be less when following the IVG path — assuming a healthy hormonal and nutritional environment for the child during gestation which, while not being genetic factors, could retard their development? Of course since embryo selection would be involved, the children who are brought to term could be selected for their improbably high markers for various attributes, but if you were to bring all (let's say) 100 embryos to term and measure their intelligence in a uniform way, would the heritability roughly match that of natural live birth.
2. What would you recommend is the best method for me to get my IQ tested as a (near) 24-year old male with formal math and physics training? I've only taken one online test so far through the open source psychometric project. I don't know if you'd recommend taking others or going in as blind as possible; my impression is that intelligence sets a rough cap on how well you can do, even with training, but I just want to get as accurate a reading as possible.
3. I personally put more stock in fluid intelligence, but is that misguided? I've actively avoided taking practice tests in my past classes because I wanted to challenge myself with needing to solve problems on the fly precisely because I innately placed more value on the fluid. Crystallized intelligence just seems more like knowledge than intelligence — though I understand they can act synergistically. And are there other components of intelligence which you'd give greater deference?
4. Lastly, I'm working on a master's in data science through CU Boulder, and I'll be getting into statistical analysis and modeling (among other things). Reading/listening to people such as yourself, Bryan Caplan, Antony Davies, and David D. Friedman have ignited my interest in econometrics and psychometrics. However, time is limited, and I'd like to pursue more of my interests in pure math/physics such as homotopy type theory, quantum computation/information science, topological data analysis, etc. Would it be worth it for me to devote time to learning these more statistical/applied disciplines in light of my proclivities for more pure disciplines? I get the impression that there are less people inclined towards pure fields than to applied ones, but also the applied ones are more likely to help me make sense of the world.
IVG will probably not be safe for at least 20+ years I believe. Just look at the trajectory of the existing IVF technology. We started doing IVF on mice in the 1950s. It wasn't until 1978 when the first IVF baby was born. Maybe something that happened that will make this go faster. But I don't trust it (and I'm a big supporter of this technology).
I believe that the best "bang for the buck" is to do incremental improvements on egg retrieval on a massive scale. If we can get 1000 eggs per IVF cycle instead of 30-40 for a young woman today, it will vastly improve the odds of successfully selecting the best embryo.
Why don't you just marry and have children before age 35? Have sex- it's worked for millenia. Make babies. Be happy and stop worshipping technology as though IT is what is making you fertile. It is not, it is actually first robbing you of your fertility (by persuading you that you need them) and then selling it back to those it sees as worthy. Nothing but late stage eugenics. Wake up already.
If one only has resources to raise 3-4 kids, and you want those 3-4 kids to be at least +2 SD, the only way to achieve that is through embryo selection. If you have a "God child" (to borrow the phrase from the movie Gattaca), the chances of that happening is small if you choose a spouse of similar IQ. Regression to the mean at work.
That is, two people of IQ 130 will generally not produce children of IQ 130. They will average lower. You might get lucky and get a child at 145 if you have 10 kids like Elon Musk. But most people do not have those resources.
Imagine believing that it's only worthwhile to have a child if it's "+2 SD". Imagine thinking so little of your own self-worth and that of your loving spouse, that you feel your naturally created children would need to be technologically manipulated to be worthwhile- that the way God would make them would NOT suffice. And that OTHER (elitist and arrogant) humans are the key to a child more superior than the one God would make. I think there are many many clues in your premises that prove you have been emotionally and intellectually manipulated by satanists. The definition of which is, those who want to, and feel worthy to, supplant god.
And the reason 3-4 kids sounds so economically unfeasible is because those same elitists who put these stupid and self serving ideas into your head, are robbing you blind, and can do so because you have no control over your "leaders", who all work for them and against you. You should wake up right about now.
Thank you for insights. I have to wonder why you're even here reading and commenting. Emil's entire field of research and writing is on IQ, genetic differences, GWAS, etc.
If you're happy conceiving and raising children "the natural way", then go ahead. Nothing is stopping you. Take your chances with Down syndrome, schizophrenia, multiple sclerosis, and a whole bunch of other diseases. I'll have children my own way. You do believe in reproductive freedom right?
Imagine having been so immersed in the elistism of the day that you don't even realize that eugenics is evil! It's the nazis 2.0. Welcome to the fourth reich.
How to tell the world that you are so brainwashed that you cannot even process information outside of the epistemological bubble of your human techno-god wanna-bes. Stop going along with every grasp-at-god-status of those who apparently have you hypnotised.
And while you are at it, step away from those vaccines already.
By "promoted this technology" I think you mean talk to friends and family about it. Whenever I mentioned PGT-P to people of child bearing age they are interested.
The best political hope for the technology is that it stays under everyones radar until enough people have done it that its impossible to stop.
lol, I bet had I not commented on the previous post in the Skype group this article probably wouldn't even be written 😏
I predict one will find first adoption outside of the West. I suspect China will be first because of less moral scruples and more wealth. If they don’t keep it some sort of State “secret”, then the very entrepreneurial Chinese will of course offer such clinical services for all who can afford it. Designer babies might only be an airfare away. :-)
This of course will cause an even greater disparity among the people, i.e., the rich get smarter and the poor get dumber. Even if we made it widely available in say, the USA, we’d probably have a disparity among the races since this family “planning” especially requires some low time preference proclivities.
Isn’t the problem here that high IQ actually causes low fecundity? As I understand it, intelligent people prioritise education and careers, so even if they want a family, they end up having few children later in life. By contrast, stupid people haven’t the sense to use birth control properly, and don’t have anything better to do anyway, so they have more children. Supposing we used technology to make everyone more intelligent, wouldn’t everyone just have fewer children, causing TFR to drop?
Well, yes, it does, in current environment.
It's more education, more specifically, women education than IQ per se.
More brainwashing. Skipping the liberal-arts brainwashing until age 35 and having a loving family is BAD BAD BAD. Only stupid people do that! MUST KILL BABIES. MUST ELIMINATE BIRTHS. Can't you see that you are sucking up propaganda from a class of individuals that DESPISE the masses and revel in watching you kill your own children?! Literally sacrificing them at the altar of elitism. Shame.
It's opportunity cost. Time spent raising kids is time you don't spend on work and hobbies, and this cost is higher for those who can obtain lucrative careers and afford fun stuff like travel, especially for women who do the majority of the childrearing work.
That's the problem. High IQ people tend to have fewer kids. This correlates with income until income reaches $500K I believe. Beyond that the wife stops working and they'll have 3-5 kids. Elon Musk is the canonical example. He has 10 kids.
There has to be more pro-natalist people at the right tail.
People don‘t even know about IQ decline in alt-right spheres, how do you expect the general public to notice and care. Libtards are fundamentally against eugenics aswell as most religious/conservatives. People with low IQ also dislike messing with human life. The longer we wait the harder it gets to develop such technology. It‘s over, it never began. Move to poland if you want to contribute to humanity
I don't think most people will do it for meta-social reasons like IQ decline. They'll just want Little Johnny to be stronger and smarter than the Jones's kids. Watch the start of Gattaca for how it'll work. (And watch the rest of Gattaca because it's a great movie.)
High IQ, conservatives, christian, can feed itself, good economy, large military, western culture, highly religious
WHAT A SURPRISE! My comment noting how sick and evil it is to presume to be able to choose who lives and die has VANISHED. The elitists like Emil are amoralists with god-complexes. Anyone who isn't triggered by this article has already been brainwashed by the satanic elite who want nothing more than to take the place of God, who they presume they have hoodwinked you into disavowing. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
Sorry, our satanic elites do not want this technology, else it would be ubiquitous already.
And this has nothing to do with who lives and who dies. The choice to pick embryos isn't far from woman choosing a man to reproduce with.
False; You prove yourself to be hypnotised by their lies. An embryo is a completed human being- it just isn't very large yet. But it is undeniably a unique human life. This article is evidence of the god-despising elites trying to roll out the technology and persuade you that child-sacrifice is a lovely option. It's such a gorgeous deception isn't it? A two-for one for the evil-doers. The fact that it didn't happen prior to now is not proof that the elite don't want it, surely your debate skills must be better than that! Neither is it proof that they aren't already using this technology for their own progeny.
I respect christians but not stopping dygenics is literally bringing us back to the stone age. Read The Past is a Future country for more info.
This is another type of dystopian scenario. Artificial wombs turn humans into a eusocial species.
In addition to using GWAS, we can just eliminate rare alleles (which are much more likely to have extremely bad effects than frequent alleles, which is why they are rare in the first place)
I honestly had no idea there would ever be a way to produce offspring using the genetics of same sex parents, let alone a single parent. As a gay guy who's been thinking about having children since I was myself a child, this greatly excites me. Being quite libertarian and having a relatively robust conscience, I trust myself to use such technology in a productive and responsible manner. Plus I know my talent for math, physics, and music (somewhat) bodes well for any children I have while also making it likely I'll be able to afford using such technology and raising a large family.
I've got a few questions for you Emil:
1. Is there any reason why heritability of cognitive qualities would be less when following the IVG path — assuming a healthy hormonal and nutritional environment for the child during gestation which, while not being genetic factors, could retard their development? Of course since embryo selection would be involved, the children who are brought to term could be selected for their improbably high markers for various attributes, but if you were to bring all (let's say) 100 embryos to term and measure their intelligence in a uniform way, would the heritability roughly match that of natural live birth.
2. What would you recommend is the best method for me to get my IQ tested as a (near) 24-year old male with formal math and physics training? I've only taken one online test so far through the open source psychometric project. I don't know if you'd recommend taking others or going in as blind as possible; my impression is that intelligence sets a rough cap on how well you can do, even with training, but I just want to get as accurate a reading as possible.
3. I personally put more stock in fluid intelligence, but is that misguided? I've actively avoided taking practice tests in my past classes because I wanted to challenge myself with needing to solve problems on the fly precisely because I innately placed more value on the fluid. Crystallized intelligence just seems more like knowledge than intelligence — though I understand they can act synergistically. And are there other components of intelligence which you'd give greater deference?
4. Lastly, I'm working on a master's in data science through CU Boulder, and I'll be getting into statistical analysis and modeling (among other things). Reading/listening to people such as yourself, Bryan Caplan, Antony Davies, and David D. Friedman have ignited my interest in econometrics and psychometrics. However, time is limited, and I'd like to pursue more of my interests in pure math/physics such as homotopy type theory, quantum computation/information science, topological data analysis, etc. Would it be worth it for me to devote time to learning these more statistical/applied disciplines in light of my proclivities for more pure disciplines? I get the impression that there are less people inclined towards pure fields than to applied ones, but also the applied ones are more likely to help me make sense of the world.
IVG will probably not be safe for at least 20+ years I believe. Just look at the trajectory of the existing IVF technology. We started doing IVF on mice in the 1950s. It wasn't until 1978 when the first IVF baby was born. Maybe something that happened that will make this go faster. But I don't trust it (and I'm a big supporter of this technology).
I believe that the best "bang for the buck" is to do incremental improvements on egg retrieval on a massive scale. If we can get 1000 eggs per IVF cycle instead of 30-40 for a young woman today, it will vastly improve the odds of successfully selecting the best embryo.
Why don't you just marry and have children before age 35? Have sex- it's worked for millenia. Make babies. Be happy and stop worshipping technology as though IT is what is making you fertile. It is not, it is actually first robbing you of your fertility (by persuading you that you need them) and then selling it back to those it sees as worthy. Nothing but late stage eugenics. Wake up already.
If one only has resources to raise 3-4 kids, and you want those 3-4 kids to be at least +2 SD, the only way to achieve that is through embryo selection. If you have a "God child" (to borrow the phrase from the movie Gattaca), the chances of that happening is small if you choose a spouse of similar IQ. Regression to the mean at work.
That is, two people of IQ 130 will generally not produce children of IQ 130. They will average lower. You might get lucky and get a child at 145 if you have 10 kids like Elon Musk. But most people do not have those resources.
Imagine believing that it's only worthwhile to have a child if it's "+2 SD". Imagine thinking so little of your own self-worth and that of your loving spouse, that you feel your naturally created children would need to be technologically manipulated to be worthwhile- that the way God would make them would NOT suffice. And that OTHER (elitist and arrogant) humans are the key to a child more superior than the one God would make. I think there are many many clues in your premises that prove you have been emotionally and intellectually manipulated by satanists. The definition of which is, those who want to, and feel worthy to, supplant god.
And the reason 3-4 kids sounds so economically unfeasible is because those same elitists who put these stupid and self serving ideas into your head, are robbing you blind, and can do so because you have no control over your "leaders", who all work for them and against you. You should wake up right about now.
Thank you for insights. I have to wonder why you're even here reading and commenting. Emil's entire field of research and writing is on IQ, genetic differences, GWAS, etc.
If you're happy conceiving and raising children "the natural way", then go ahead. Nothing is stopping you. Take your chances with Down syndrome, schizophrenia, multiple sclerosis, and a whole bunch of other diseases. I'll have children my own way. You do believe in reproductive freedom right?
I see your point Mr. David. But don't wait too long. The technology is not quite there yet.
It will be mandatory by 2075
Too late. We will have collapsed by then
Yeah that would be awesome. I guess one could try and invest in the companies mentioned in the screenshot.
Imagine having been so immersed in the elistism of the day that you don't even realize that eugenics is evil! It's the nazis 2.0. Welcome to the fourth reich.
How to tell the world that you are so brainwashed that you cannot even process information outside of the epistemological bubble of your human techno-god wanna-bes. Stop going along with every grasp-at-god-status of those who apparently have you hypnotised.
And while you are at it, step away from those vaccines already.