[zavi]

I'm 26 right now and I'm not planning to have kids until I'm 35 for this exact reason. I don't want my kid to say: "Daddy, why do other kids have disease resistance and I don't? Do you not love me? Or were you one of those stupid anti-CRISPRers who don't believe in science (the anti-vaxxers of the next decades)?"

I'd rather wait for 5-10 years to make sure I don't make a lifelong mistake.

[saalweachter]

Frankly the technology is not 5-10 years away. Decades, plural. I'd be surprised if we saw it used as a reproductive aid to correct severe hereditary genetic disorders in the next 5-10 years, and we won't see it used for optional modifications until we have twenty or thirty years of experience from the "better than the alternatives" modifications that the techniques aren't just creating massive amounts of cancer.

[SamReidHughes]

Every year you wait, your sperms carry more and more mutations.

[zavi]

Sperm frozen in a foreign cryobank since 2017

[SamReidHughes]

Nice. (Why foreign?)

[zavi]

It's cheaper.

[zozbot123]

That's easily fixed: freeze your sperms. A bit pricey, but not nearly as much as a baby, CRISPR or otherwise.

[SamReidHughes]

For those wondering, this guy's reply came first. He called it!

[patrickthebold]

I did the same thing with my last computer. I waited years because something better was just around the corner.

[toomuchtodo]

Don’t wait too long, reproductive tissue begins to degrade in your 30s.

[p1esk]

Source?

[toomuchtodo]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3536609/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3253726/

[fma]

5-10 years for this stuff to pass FDA approval? Better luck with your grandkids instead.

[zavi]

中国更快