dwarfism

There are tons of nasty side effects that go with dwarfism; it's not as though it's _just_ being short.

Being short is not a flaw but dwarfism is not the same as simply being shorter than average.

Even people without dwarfism tend to be looked on less favorably if they're shorter than average.

It would promote more of the genes in society, because dwarfism is sexually selected against.

If it is due to a birth defect, dwarfism or some other condition that is also a disability then it is a protected class.

What makes an affluent white woman more important to you than an impoverished Indian with dwarfism?Your organization is toxic.

I'm not sure this particular treatment would actually do anything, since it acts against a genetic mutation causing dwarfism, but I'm not a doctor.

The idea that dwarfism isn't a disadvantage is the kind absurdity now promoted by mainstream culture in the name of sensitivity.

If dwarfism becomes something that's routinely treated in childhood, like a cleft palate, then there will still be people who have it, but no one with access to basic health care will be affected by it.

“Abnormal body shape,” “ugly facial looks,” dwarfism, and “obvious beer belly,” “too many wrinkles,” “eye disorders,” and many other “low quality” traits are all enough to keep uploads out of the algorithmic fire hose.

Interestingly, one variant of hereditary dwarfism that is present in a small group of people, Laron syndrome [1], is a good illustration to show that methods of altering the operation of metabolism to extend healthy life in short-lived mammals should not be expected to produce anywhere near the same gains in long-lived humans.