Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Just saw your quoted text, and I do think the reasoning is incorrect.

What is gets right is that there are some serious practical limitations. The most important are around the availability of embryos, financial costs, and diminishing returns.

What it gets wrong is modeling the implementation as an optimization tool opposed to a screening tool.

If you have a pool 10 embryos, with a trait on a normal distribution (eg IQ), you can screen the bottom half out. By doing so, the average IQ goes from 100 (normal mean) to 110, mean for embryos over 100.

People want genetic children, but if for example, a wife is infertile, eggs can be purchased for ~$2.5k.[1]

Using today's technology, you could buy 100 eggs, screen the top 10% (>120), and the average embryo in the pool would be now be the 95th percentile for IQ (eg 125, +1.66 Standard deviations above the mean)

The next technology needed to knock this wide open would the the cloning or duplication of human eggs from a single source. IVT egg extraction yields only 5-10 eggs per cycle. If this could be multiplied in-vitro, money would be the only constraint.

https://www.cryosinternational.com/en-us/us-shop/client/how-...



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: