[adventured]

The same reason they're the first to work with CRISPR in humans, despite the US having a formerly vast R&D lead.

It's because they're fundamentally a lot less concerned about killing people in the process. There's a reasonable debate to be had on whether the US is too concerned with the risk aspect of making progress on biotech.

[qiqing]

> fundamentally a lot less concerned about killing people in the process

That's rather flippant, and I'd like to provide a counterpoint. Some neuroscience researchers held a town hall discussion in a major US city and also in a major Chinese city (on two different occasions) about bioethics, and one of the topics discussed was whether it was morally right or wrong (in the case of IVF) to screen for IQ, assuming we had reliable markers. So, same parents, no edits, but out of N embryos, instead of randomly selecting one, you choose one that's likely to be the smartest. Assuming it works reliably, is that wrong?

The U.S. audience was split approx. 50/50, with most of the objections about how it was going against God's will, or that it was "unnatural." The Chinese audience was all for it, and expressed surprise that the U.S. audience was split. Because if you could, and the technique was reliable, why wouldn't you?

Sometimes, it's useful to take a second look at our cultural biases.

[stevenwoo]

On the other hand, the accepted use of selective gender abortion (where the problem made the male/female ratio out of wack especially in rural areas IIRC) in China versus the controversialness of abortion being legal in the USA (re: the persistence of attempts to limit access but observing the minimal literal interpretation of Roe v. Wade) might explain a willingness to let people make choices in China over the USA. Where else are you going to read that!?

[qiqing]

> might explain a willingness to let people make choices in China

Annoying things I sometimes hear from relatives during family re-unions:

* Is it true that abortion isn't legal in the U.S.? (Of course, it's allowed, but not in all places, and ... it's complicated.)

* How come people don't understand that climate change is real? Is it because creationism is taught in schools? (Well, it's not like that in all places...)

* So did those comments from Trump become public before or after the election? People must have felt duped that they voted for this kind of person, right? (Actually, those came out before the election. I have no words. ::shakes head::)

Things I might ask them that are annoying:

* I thought gender-selection abortion is illegal. What's with the ratio? (Ugh. Country-people* and their backwards attitudes about gender. You'd think that top-down mandated equal-work-for-equal-pay for a generation would have changed a few things. At least city people have reasonable attitudes.) Yeah, so how are they able to do it? (Never underestimate what a determined Chinese person will figure out how to accomplish.)

* Wait, I thought country people expect their daughters to venture into manufacturing hubs to be breadwinners for the whole family? (Yeah, exactly. They totally baby the boys.)

(Country-people is the closest thing to a racial slur I've heard in China. The amount of prejudice I hear it uttered with me makes me quite uncomfortable.)

[seanmcdirmid]

Gender abortion isn't legal in China. In fact, they aren't allowed to tell you the sex of our kid. When we did our first comprehensive ultra-sound at UFH Beijing, the technician couldn't say anything but hinted to my wife that we were having a boy. Oh well...

The point is that gender selective abortions are absolutely not legal in China. However, it is difficult to tell why you are aborting, and it is easy to look at your ultra sound pictures and tell.

(Anyways, our son is great despite me wanting a girl!)

The nongminren might have a different outlook, but in the cities girls are perfectly acceptable and welcomed.

[ikeyany]

It sounds like you're implying China is colder and less humane.

[stevenwoo]

You're reading that meaning, I'm only reciting the facts imperfectly as I may recall them. I could add a bit about how religiosity (Catholicism/evangelicalism) imposes rather arbitrary (to an outsider) limits to medical care/research (stem cell funding research partially blocked by NIH/abortion and sexual education eliminated in favor of useless abstinence guidance to USA and the rest of the world under GOP) in the USA but that seemed to add politics/religion judgement. The end result of those policies seems less humane - though some people judge policy by the policy without regard for outcome, and other people judge policy solely by outcome.

[emmelaich]

I don't think that that is a counterpoint.

If anything it supports the previous comment.