Your take on cloning and genetics.

"I worry about the use of genetics by insurance companies to deny coverage to people who are carriers of certain genes."

Are you saying insurers have no right to do that? And if so, why don't they? They are running a business, not a public service.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The problem comes in when someone cannot get insured for a condition that may never accur. You can have the gene marker for cancer, but you may never get it. But the insurance company won't care, they simply will not cover you. So if you don't have a lot of money, but make to much to be covered by medicare, you don't get any choice in your medical care. You end up using the emergency room to get antibiotics for a measly sinus infection or bronchitis. I understand not covering existing conditions, but to not cover someone because they carry the marker for a condition is ridiculous, but that is where we are headed.

Originally posted by ChinaNiki
I worry about the use of genetics by insurance companies to deny coverage to people who are carriers of certain genes. Or to deny coverage to pregnant women who choose to have a baby who has been diagnosed before birth with spina bifida, downe's syndrome, cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, or other conditions that will require a lot of medical upkeep.

Very well said, and the best take I have seen on the down side of this topic. Good job ChinaNiki. God knows that insurance companies raise their premiums whenever they see so called 'special' cases.
This could be a ghoulish opportunity for them to take advantage of people with preexisting conditions. 🙁

On the UP side,
God gave us brains, and if we use them to benefit society,
we aren't playing God, we're complementing God, because we are using the knowledge we have gained to better humanity.
I once heard a story about a little girl in Israel whose spine was severed, who, due to stem cells, was actually getting feeling back in her legs and she almost was able to walk again, until the research was cut short by the fatcat politicians who condemn the research (but yet they would probabaly use it themselves if THEY needed it.)

But Chinaniki and DB, you are missing my point. Insurance companies run a BUSINESS, not a public service. They are there to make money. What possible moral obligation do they have to not act in the way that guarantees them the most profit? They deal in risk and if genetics shows up risk, that is just bad luck for that person

If it was Government or civil insurance, then fine, you should be covered regardless. But private companies? What right does anyone have to insist they insure higher risks? None at all. They insure whoever the heck they like using whatever criteria they like, the same way a shopkeeper sells what he wants to, at whatever price he chooses.

People tend to regard insurance as a right. It is NOT, it is a service you purchase and in providing that service they have the right to make higher risks pay more. And genetics is simply going to give them a more accurate assessment of who is and isn't at risk. You could even argue that this is actually more fair for the insurers, who after all deserve to actually know the risk of each person they insure- right now they are insuring in ignorance. This is how business works.

I am afraid people will just have to live with the problems- including higher insurance premiums- that are a result of what nature gives them.

I would also suggest, Chinaniki, that the situation you describe is a result of the lack of Public Service health care. In this country you do not need specific insurance, the National Health Service treats everyone (and being a public service, at no point does any citizen have to pay more for any existing conditions he or she has). So do not hold advances in genetics as accountable for the problems caused by the healthcare systems of SOME countries.

What insurance companies may or may not do, doesn’t figure in my attempts at deciding whether or not I’m for or against cloning and all the genetic engineering.

I can’t use “what’s natural” either. It currently eludes me who said this in another thread, but mankind has progress so far beyond “natural” (just look around you), that it can’t be used to morally justify or condemn anything.

In the future we can screen for genetic defects in our children. Cool by me, should I ever want a child I want a healthy one. As scientists uncover the genes behind a lot of diseases, I can make sure my child won’t suffer from any of those.
Stem cells might help cure anything from blindness to Alzheimers. Genetic drugs can make us all slimmer, give us muscles and curves were we want them, make us smarter and more creative and live longer. Fine by me.
Using stem cells we might even get rid of organ donors, we simply grow new organs. But those cells come from fertilised eggs. Perhaps we end up like the machines in The Matrix, growing fertilised eggs and harvest organs? But it’s better than capturing street kids in Southamerica and stealing their corneas.

That was me who talked about natural, Omega.

I would also suggest, Chinaniki, that the situation you describe is a result of the lack of Public Service health care. In this country you do not need specific insurance, the National Health Service treats everyone (and being a public service, at no point does any citizen have to pay more for any existing conditions he or she has).

Yes, insurance is a business, but if they start to use genetic marking as their basis for coverage, then they could decide to deny maternity coverage to couples who both carry certain gene markers just because there is an increased risk in a baby that could have that condition. Which could really cause complications cuz certain groups have more prevalence of certain conditions.

We have a hard enough time getting insurance companies to pay for what they are already contracted to pay for. You have to argue and harass them most of the time to pay the doctor for covered treatments. And then you have to go to their chosen network doctors, who may not be the best doctor for you.

Also, getting a public health care system that provides for everyone here is at this point impossible. The word "socialism" is used to describe systems that provide for public health care to everyone and this country is adaantly against anything remotely concerned with socialism, even if it's not actually socialist.

This is becoming interesting.😄

Right on ChinaNiki. Insurance companies won't pay out as it is because they're afraid to do without their yearly bonuses, 600 dollar corinthian leather hairs and 300 dollar porcelain toilet seats with adjustable tempertaure to keep their cold hearted asses warm all year around.

Ushgarak, insurance may be a business, but the lives of human beings is NOT. You know damn well that ordinary people with certain conditions are looked down upon, while rich billionaires can persuade the companies to carry their policy, in return for a little extra something as gratitude for coveniently omitting the same rules that deny ordinary people the same coverage.

They won't pay out for someone who commits suicide,but yet if some big wig billionaire did it, the company would still pay out because Mr. Fat Bastard had the money to keep their special interests funded, right?

Human beings are all entitled to the same health care, and again, ChinaNiki points out very well that certain groups with "more prevalence of certain conditions." That's not fair.

Again, ducking out of this thread because no matter what I say, someone will take it wrong, and the world keeps on turning anyway, so what I say (or anyone says) really dosen't matter does it? **** it.

"Yes, insurance is a business, but if they start to use genetic marking as their basis for coverage, then they could decide to deny maternity coverage to couples who both carry certain gene markers just because there is an increased risk in a baby that could have that condition. Which could really cause complications cuz certain groups have more prevalence of certain conditions."

Yes, they could. So what? That is their business. They have NO obligation to do otherwise. They can judge risk on whatever criteria they want.

"Also, getting a public health care system that provides for everyone here is at this point impossible. The word "socialism" is used to describe systems that provide for public health care to everyone and this country is adaantly against anything remotely concerned with socialism, even if it's not actually socialist."

So blame the system. Don't blame the advances in genetics. Dislike how health care works in your country if you want but that is not really a relevant point to Omega's questions.

"Right on ChinaNiki. Insurance companies won't pay out as it is because they're afraid to do without their yearly bonuses, 600 dollar corinthian leather hairs and 300 dollar porcelain toilet seats with adjustable tempertaure to keep their cold hearted asses warm all year around."

If you don't want it, don't use it. If you want it, don't blame them for making money out of that demand.

"Ushgarak, insurance may be a business, but the lives of human beings is NOT"

COMPLETELY irrelevant. Insurance is a business designed to turn profit. What human beings are has no impact on that at all.

"Human beings are all entitled to the same health care"

Not under a private health care system. In that you are entitled to what you pay for. Again, dislike that if you want, but that is not relevant to the subject.

"They won't pay out for someone who commits suicide,but yet if some big wig billionaire did it, the company would still pay out because Mr. Fat Bastard had the money to keep their special interests funded, right?"

May well do. That is BUSINESS. For the last time, insurance is business, NOT public service!

"Again, ducking out of this thread because no matter what I say, someone will take it wrong, and the world keeps on turning anyway, so what I say (or anyone says) really dosen't matter does it? **** it."

If you are going to have that immature attitude, then please, yes, stay away from these threads in future.

Now then, here is the big fact of it all: ALL genetic profiling n this sense will reveal is the TRUTH. You cannot say you do not want the truth to be known because some people might act on it- especially insurance companies who only want a more accurate assessment of the risks involved, which is their PURPOSE. It is the principle they already work by, this will just make them better at it.

And could you please both stop having a dig at insurance companies in general and remain on points connected to the subject? What you think of billionaires abusing the system could not be less relevant to the thread. Insurance companies using genetic profiling to help determine risk is entirely in accordance with how insurance works, and there is really nothing else to be added to that.

i asked why humans should be cloned when we can already produce them naturaly, and someone said for people who cant. Genetic expeirimentation is working on that, but as far as cloning for people who cant have children thats what adoption is for. overpopulation is already becomming a threat

So blame the system. Don't blame the advances in genetics. Dislike how health care works in your country if you want but that is not really a relevant point to Omega's questions.

I don't blame the advances in genetics, but I am concerned with those advances being used to hinder the medical coverage of people just because of genetic predisposition. I am totally in favor of stem cell research, but I fear an already failing medical system in this country going even further downhill because insurance companies can use genetics to decide who they will cover and who they won't. This doesn't only affect regular joes like me, but doctors as well. Hospitals are closing trauma units because they can't afford the insurance costs. Doctors in fields like obstetrics will not take on high risk patients because the insurance premiums are already skyhigh just to cover insurance costs for normal pregnancies.

If you don't want it, don't use it. If you want it, don't blame them for making money out of that demand.

In this country, if you get sick, you can't afford not to have insurance. But even then they still dictate what tests you can have. They called it managed care. It used to be a doctor was simply a doctor, now they have to be businessmen first and doctor's second.

yeah well people on welfare get the best coverage, my mom has been a nurse for 30 years and now works at blue cross bluesheild and some people on welfare get better coverage than her, thats whats sickening

too true
people in between are just up sh@t's crick

Ush> It figures, sir think-a-lot. Do you have any idea how much that statement has been baking my proverbial noodle?

ChinaNiki and Dragonsblade> You still seem to miss an important point. What insurance companies, private companies in a capitalistic society chose to do, cannot be used as an argument for or against cloning and/or genetic profiling. That is a discussion about the ethics and morale of insurance companies and whether or not they should be state-owned and non-profit organisations.

And it is certainly not impossible to get a public health-care system that provides for everyone. We have that right here in Denmark where I live. Everyone here gets the same treatment at the hospitals.

I’m yet to encounter any ethical or moral objections to genetics and/or cloning as such. What business do, whether or not there’s overpopulation or not doesn’t matter. Those are irrelevant topics. It would be like arguing “I’m for abortions because the world is overpopulated.”

"i asked why humans should be cloned when we can already produce them naturaly, and someone said for people who cant. Genetic expeirimentation is working on that, but as far as cloning for people who cant have children thats what adoption is for. overpopulation is already becomming a threat"

Until they start banning people having children the normal way due to overpopulation, they should not ban people having children via genetic science either- that just denies opportunity to the less fortunate. Unlike insurance, having children IS a right and should be afforded equally to all.

Chinaniki and Ragesremorse, I believe I did just ask for peoplle NOT to turn this into a broad attack on the mechanics of insurance companies in your country. Omega is very right to point out its irrelevance, Please keep your arguments on-topic. I understand you are worried about the use insurance companies will make of genetic data but we know that know, it doesn't affect what Omega is asking, and further investigation into the behaviour of insurance is only a distraction. Thankyou.

Cloning scares me. If they get it perfected, whos to say you cant be replaced by a clone, all they need is one small skin/hair sample and they have your entire genetic code then they can build a replacement you 😱 😑

Originally posted by Baylin
Cloning scares me. If they get it perfected, whos to say you cant be replaced by a clone, all they need is one small skin/hair sample and they have your entire genetic code then they can build a replacement you 😱 😑

Not really. The choices you make determine who you are. The different circumstances form your character. Although the person coming after you sill have the exact code they will go through many different circumstances as they grow older. In truth they would be a totally different generation. More like children than your clone.

Originally posted by bigbadbike2
Not really. The choices you make determine who you are. The different circumstances form your character. Although the person coming after you sill have the exact code they will go through many different circumstances as they grow older. In truth they would be a totally different generation. More like children than your clone.

Yeah but if you say didnt go along with something and was making a political waves and they wanted rid of you, instead of just disappearing you could be replaced by a specially conditioned clone. Not that I'm paranoid about government conspiracies or anything 😱

To be honest I'm not really paranoid, I actually think genetics is a good thing. Imagine your hearts been destroyed by disease. Instead of waiting for a donor and then having to spend the rest of your life an anti-rejection drugs they could just grow you a new heart tailor made to your own body guarenteed disease free with no hassles of rejection now that would be good!

Originally posted by Baylin
Yeah but if you say didnt go along with something and was making a political waves and they wanted rid of you, instead of just disappearing you could be replaced by a specially conditioned clone. Not that I'm paranoid about government conspiracies or anything 😱

To be honest I'm not really paranoid, I actually think genetics is a good thing. Imagine your hearts been destroyed by disease. Instead of waiting for a donor and then having to spend the rest of your life an anti-rejection drugs they could just grow you a new heart tailor made to your own body guarenteed disease free with no hassles of rejection now that would be good!

Maybe even on day they could just insert certain Dna structures back into you failing organs causing them to regenerate.

BTW: Did you know that scientifically we should be able to regenerate. Scientists have said our bodily structure carries all the genitics to regenerate we just do not. They have yet to be able to explain why.

EDITED

Dagon, I clearly said I did not want any more debate away from the topic. I CERTAINLY did not want what was basically abuse aimed at me.

Do not continue to ignore the rulings of the mods in future. Stay on-topic.