[neuronic]

The incredibly vast sphere of gene-to-gene interactions is very poorly understood.

Anything changed in the DNA can have completely unforeseen consequences because genes and their products influence expression of other genes.

Which genes does each gene influence? Directly or indirectly? To what extent (strength of up- or downregulation)? Only under specific conditions? Only if 3 other genes are present and not regulated in a different manner?

I have done some computational gene interaction analysis by building regulatory interaction networks in Cytoscape using sequencing and expression data based on specific research [1].

My subjective impression is that messing with genes is little but an unpredictable endeavor at this point. The gamble may pay off but I don't think anyone can honestly tell you something about long-term effects in each individual.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503487/

[lawlessone]

I think i'd take the gamble over living in an isolation room for my entire life

[MrEldritch]

It doesn't really matter whether you would or would not take the gamble; it depends on whether the FDA would be willing to let you.

(I'm not saying this as some kind of rrrgh-gubmint-bad thing. It's pretty normal for the government to have authority over what gambles are acceptable to offer in what circumstances, and which ones are exploitative and detrimental to even offer; this is the logic behind, for instance, regulations of actual gambling.)

[neuronic]

Yes of course, but think about gene therapy for far less intrusive health issues.

If more common and widespread health problems are tackled with gene therapy and we wouldn't know the consequences long term (we really don't) then this aspect becomes far more problematic.

Like you, I would also take the gamble if it's a Hail Mary attempt at surviving or making a somewhat normal life possible. But that's not the point I was trying to tackle.