Someone aged at least 30+ claimed to have been genetically modified at birth - was that possible?

Hardly. The technology didn’t exist at that time.

Yes, it is possible – but highly unlikely. Experiments and actions involving eugenics lost their popularity after the Holocaust. It’s not so much the question of whether the “state of science” was advanced enough. Humans have been interested in this for hundreds of years. The tests and theories have improved greatly. But the growth of acceptance is much slower. Most modern scientists researching genetic engineering are doing so with plants and diseases/disorders.

Perhaps your friend is the result (more so sidedish or afterthought) of some genetic experimentation; this does not mean it worked though. She needs to supply more information about this. Her being the “result” of some experiment could mean anything. For all she knows, this experiment was nothing but her birth mother eating more “brain food” – as there is some science in that.

There are failed experiments and debunked theories all the time. Perhaps she was one of them. By the way you explained it, if she meant actual modern genetic engineering, the more likely her story is false or extremely exagerated.

Two links on Eugenics and genetic engineering you may find helpful.

I’d have assumed that someone genetically engineered for superior intelligence could have thought up a more believable “make me seem more interesting at the dinner party” lie… ;)

Thanks for the replies!

I’m inclined to think she was (at least) a bit of a fantasist since she did also go on at length about conspiracy theories involving the financial system and how she had various encounters with the rich and famous. I’d put it down to the nature of dinner parties and how some might feel a desire to appear interesting to others as derekfnord has suggested (!) even though it got me wondering in general…

In her telling, she claimed her father was a research scientist and her mother a nurse; that she was ‘born’ in/around L.A. (her birth cert says) at a research facility i.e. not a regular hospital although I don’t know if such info is actually recorded on U.S. birth certs since I’m from another country. Didn’t say what type of genetic experiment it was either – apparently everybody around her was tight lipped about it when asked… I was also a guest at the party and had a hard time trying not to roll my eyes!

Sounds like she’s crazy.

That being said, it IS likely that the government possessed this technology 30 years ago. The military/government is about 25 years ahead of us in technology. So if they officially cloned the first animal in 1997, they actually cloned animals for the first time in the early 1970’s, and probably moved on to humans by the 1980’s.

So I think it is reasonable to think they were doing genetic experiments 30+ years ago.

@intrepidium Think she may have been released too early or has been off her meds.

Vast difference between “genetically modified” and “eugenics.”

The first acknowledged test tube baby, Louise Brown, was born in July 1978. That was almost 33 years ago for the birth (nearly 34 years, if you count back to the date of fertilization.) So it is at least theoretically possible that your acquaintance could be a test tube baby born subsequent to that date. And who knows what other “research” may have gone into her “genetic selection” (i.e., the choice of the donor sperm or egg source) in addition to the fact of in vitro fertilization.

So, depending on how she defines “genetic modification” (stuff always comes down to what words mean – and what people believe they mean when they use them or hear them), there may or may not be some validity to her claim.

However, “genetic modification” in the sense that we use it today, to mean actual manipulation of the genetic code of the egg or zygote… no, that wasn’t possible then.

The first IVF baby was created in 1978 if I remember correctly, so she would be around 33 years old. Cells can be removed from the embro and analyzed, discarding embyos that have genetic traits not desired. But, back then it was not commonplace to do it. Genetic engineering implies actually changing the genetics, which is a different thing altogether. Probably the science was there back then, so maybe it is possible, but highly improbable.

At the top someone mentioned the Nazi’s, and of course they did breed children for specific features. But that was back 70+ years ago. I do personally know aman who is a grandchild of one of those breeders. He is blond, with high cheekbones, blue eyes, extremely intelligent.

@WasCy So, depending on how she defines “genetic modification” (stuff always comes down to what words mean – and what people believe they mean when they use them or hear them), there may or may not be some validity to her claim.
However, “genetic modification” in the sense that we use it today, to mean actual manipulation of the genetic code of the egg or zygote… no, that wasn’t possible then.

You said it exactly what I was fumbling around trying to say.
;-)

No. The capability was reached after 1981.

The ability to put the genetic material from one organism in to another was first perfected in the early 70’s. The first company using genetic engineering was founded in 76 and bacteria with a human gene (the gene for insulin) inserted into them were produced. The FDA approved the product (Humulin) for treatment of diabetes in 82.

So the tech was definately around in time. However why the fuck would a company spend millions of dollars on manipulating the genes in some random girl no one has ever heard of?

Maybe her parents played a joke on her.

Maybe she is just confused. I am born from artificial insemination, but people think I mean IVF (which was not done until after I was born). Maybe her parents told her something she really did not understand?

The Men in Black are knocking on her door as we read about her. She never should’ve told.