Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
False
News & media
Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
Debate current medical affairs
The Telegraph report: "A team has been able to predict the whole genetic code of a foetus by taking a blood sample from a woman who was 18 weeks pregnant, and a swab of saliva from the father. T
0
Cat:OffDutyForum:NewsMedia
Cat:OffDutyForum:NewsMediaDiscussion:5f1889e8-ea21-4943-bd24-da8fce1f405f
Forums » Off duty » News & media » Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
|
Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
posted at 8/6/2012 9:36 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 1444
First: 7/4/2011 Last: 21/5/2013 |
The Telegraph report: "A team has been able to predict the whole genetic code of a foetus by taking a blood sample from a woman who was 18 weeks pregnant, and a swab of saliva from the father. They believe that, in time, the test will become widely available, enabling doctors to screen unborn babies for some 3,500 genetic disorders. At the moment the only genetic disorder routinely tested for on the NHS is Down’s syndrome." Some have said that by testing for every little genetic difference or fault, that this will lead to more abortions. Is testing for this amount of genetic faults a good idea? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9315265/Unborn-babies-could-be-tested-for-3500-genetic-faults.html |
|
Re: Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
posted at 8/6/2012 11:43 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 1784
First: 7/3/2009 Last: 18/5/2013 |
I think testing is still a food idea. We do have some very serious disorders and findingout about those is important, not because such casesare to be ended by abortion, but to let the parents prepare and know what lies ahead For some the low statistics merits no testing, but for the parent the very low probability can become 100%..... Would I allow abortions because the parents don't like the colour of the eyes or the child has a less than perfect predictable social capabilities? No/ But it has not been that long ago that pregnancy was a complete mystery, there were no ultrasonographic screenings. Now we perceive it as a fully accepted procedure.
|
|
|
Re: Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
posted at 12/6/2012 3:59 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 3045
First: 27/3/2012 Last: 20/5/2013 |
Although these tests may cause a financial overburden on the parents, the tests to detect genetic disorders may often be rewarding in early diagnosis of the genetic defects, & an early action could be taken against serious defects by aborting the defective fetuses. Prevention & early detection of genetic defects is always better! |
|
|
Re: Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
posted at 12/6/2012 7:35 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 311
First: 7/5/2009 Last: 2/4/2013 |
The idea sounds really good and holds great potential if widely available. But let us pause for a moment and see the actual state of affair of pre-natal care and delivery system in most of the low resourced countries in Africa and Asia. For the time being the focus should be on improving the pre natal care and reducing maternal and child mortality rate. The 3500 Rare disorders can wait
|
Forums » Off duty » News & media » Should unborn babies be tested for 3,500 genetic faults?
