A proposed procedure would use IVF to fertilise the egg of a woman affected by mitochondrial disease with her partner’s sperm. The genetic material of the fertilised egg that determines the characteristics of the potential child would then be transferred to the shell of an egg donated by a woman who has healthy mitochondria. This procedure would not be allowed under the current law.
Critics (well, critic...I was listening to this on the radio which I can't link to) are concerned that this 'opens the door' to genetic engineering and the like, arguing that the slippery slope isn't invalid in that once this is allowed how can you object to further modifications (I'll take a swing, 'we allow this one to prevent a debilitating disease, not to 'augment' a person...but then, I don't know that I'm against a little engineering. Sci-fi concepts aside, if my parents could have moved a gene or two here or there so I didn't start balding at 17, I'd be pissed that they didn't. My hair was awesome.)
Eh? Is this a bold step forward to do away with genetic diseases, a scary step towards a Huxley like distopia where we all look like Justin Timberlake? Something that probably won't work and we'll never hear about it again? What effect will this have on 'your momma' jokes?