the mother and donors nucleus' are removed from the eggs. the donor's nucleus is then disposed of and replaced with the mother's nucleus; leaving an egg with healthy mitochondria and the mothers nucleus.
this egg is then fertilised and then re-implanted into the mother.
the child then contains 1% DNA from another person, and that DNA will also be passed on to future generations within that family.
i am studying the topic for an extended project as part of my a-levels and im interested in what everyone has to say about whether you think it should be allowed and why you have come to your reasons considering both the medical and ethical side of the argument
thanks for your input!
If the technology is safe and mature, which is a technical question for embryologists, then I see no problem. I don't see why we shouldn't use technology to prevent disease, none of the ethical questions associated with genetic engineering or human cloning arise. And as a technology, it's related to several other important developing areas such as same-sex reproduction and artificial gametes, both of which hold lots of promise for the future.
Allows for gay couples to have truly their own children. How is that not ****ing awesome?!
Why can't we try and find medicines for these conditions rather than tamper with nature?
also what is your title?
sounds very interesting and i'd love to read your essay when you're done
Without the genetic material the third donor (of the egg cell) has provided next to nothing.
The child is still pretty much inheriting the genetics of it's two intended parents.
Why don't people just adopt if they're that adamant to have a child? Helping the world at the same time.
Blood alone makes not a loving parental-child bond.