Read more: berkeleygenomics.org/articles/Chr...

Comment here or on LessWrong: www.lesswrong.com/posts/PneJmh...

Another idea is RNA sequencing. In theory, based on work of Bhutani et al., it could be possible to identify what alleles made into a sperm's haploid genome by sequencing the RNAs in that sperm, without destroying the DNA itself.

This article analyzes this problem theoretically, looks at existing methods, and proposes a couple (AFAIK) novel ideas. One new idea is complementary identification: you destructively identify all but one chromosome, and infer the remaining one.

Essay: berkeleygenomics.org/articles/Gen...

Discussion: lesswrong.com/posts/rdbqmy...

Reading on Sunday, 12:00 PM Pacific time (roughly 50 min), followed by discussion / Q&A:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xllh...

* Understanding public interest in reprogenetics
* Understanding the regulatory landscape around reprogenetics
* Educating the public about reprogenetics

Read more about these projects here: berkeleygenomics.org/articles/Som...

LessWrong: lesswrong.com/posts/qjJDr2...

Berkeley Genomics: berkeleygenomics.org/articles/Pol...

PDF: berkeleygenomics.org/pdfs/Policy_...

* Change the 14-day rule for in vitro embryos to the 28-day rule
* Have the FDA proactively provide regulatory standards
* Make a primate research center for assisted reproductive technologies

Let's enable all parents to have the healthy babies they want!

Full article links:

This is my recommendation as the first place to start to understand the overall technical problem from a biotech perspective.

Read the full article here:
www.lesswrong.com/posts/49Y2WD...

There's still lots of crucial open questions, like what happens if you have several UPD-like missing imprints at less-crucial imprinting regions. But this natural experiment at least tells us where the sex-linked imprints are that we most need to get right.

Sometimes UPD results in developmental disorders such as Prader–Willi syndrome; sometimes UPD has little or no apparent effect.

The most direct way: uniparental disomy. A small fraction of people inherit a pair of chromosomes at some index from one parent, and no chromosomes from the other parent. Those people will have the wrong sex-linked imprints on those chromosomes, but otherwise normal imprinting.

Paternal and maternal imprints are a key part of a competent epigenomic state. How can we tell which of these imprints are most important for development--which would be most harmful if they aren't in the right state?

I hope this will help put some doubt into those who want to unduly restrict genomic liberty.

Read the article here:
lesswrong.com/posts/JFWiM7...

Against this principle, some people feel that some genes really are obviously bad, and shouldn't be allowed.

Bill Thurston was a unique mind, whose existence suggests it's not so easy to know when someone else's way of being will be valuable to them or to others.