I am affraid to say that what you most probably would find are ugliness genes.
What we regard as beauty is the final result of many genes interacting among them, making what is an harmonious whole. For example, there are many genes that are required to make a good skin. None of these genes code the beauty of it. It is the result of all them working together. Beauty is highly polygenic and epistatic. However, variation in beauty in the sense of variation in ugliness can be easily spotted and would be possibly mapped. Thus you may end up with genes with some alleles that give rise to, say, pimples.
I concede that this may end up in something useful... if you narrow down the haplotype to a single gene, and that gene is drugable, and its role is not highly epistatic.
It is possible. I admit it. But, if I had the money, I wouldn't put in it. Sorry.

I like your thinking, and I concur with several of webglee's points, but I have to question your choice of population sample.  Are models' registration points better suited to be viewed two dimensionally as opposed to in three [and four] dimensions?  In other words, wouldn't it be better to sample those with stunning good looks in person, not those predisposed to appearing perfect on film.  There is an important difference, I think.  Oh yeah, how about saliva or hair DNA tests over primative blood draws?

I recently had an argument with my girlfriend as the whether a world full of genetically engineered "beautiful" people would be better or worse than the one we have now where only a relatively few get to be really physically attractive.  

She felt a world of good-looking people would result in never before seen superficiality, but I think it would cause folks to see past mere looks because *everyone* would be attractive.  Suddenly the beautiful people of the world would have to be well-rounded and mature individuals if they hoped to remain *truly attractive.*  

I wish to say I have seen too many homely looking young women in my life who were such good people but men were just not interested in them romantically and it broke their hearts (I realize perhaps not all women would care).  Of course this is only further proof that life is not fair (as I hope we all know).  Are looks important for the man looking to attract a mate? Yes, but I feel even more so for women.  And even with shifts taking place in the culture (more women getting good educations and making an excellent living) I see things changing only so much.      

I realize to an extent this is simplistic because there are many physically attractive people who are not superficial and consider it important to be well-rounded, good people.  But I think most would agree I have brought up some interesting food for thought.

Best wishes,

John Grigg

"Beauty genes" would possibly exert the bulk of their effect by regulating embryonic or early postnatal development... So targeting them pharmacoloically in the adult might not do the trick.

If you're after a germ-line engineering product for a transhumanist niche market open to that idea, it would be much more powerful. But transhumanists on the other hand tend not to want kids in the first place... Tough market buddy ;-)

"...So targeting them pharmacologically in the adult might not do the trick. "

A good many beauty components/ fundamentals may actually be       youth and health cues, I think.  Of course, there's plenty of 'health' directed science research, but I'm aware of scant to zero youth restoration science research, one exception to my statement being L'Oreal's gray hair reversal therapy: http://www.loreal.com/_en/_ww/research/orientations/hair.aspx

"Beauty 'tis but a season on the lips." Oscar Wilde(?)  
Also see Ancient Greek concept of "Horaios".

I know of a couple more...

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/1/emw333476.htm

Telomerase based skin therapy..

And of course we all know about the muscle building gene therapy for athletes...

Put those three together and you get a fairly descent looking 'old' body. Now if we can just do something about the fat we seem to accumulate.. we at least don't have to look old in say.. they next 15 years or so.

Amazing, oortog!  I hadn't heard of telomerizing agents.  Have animal studies been conducted which demonstrate the claims of restoration?  I'd be surprised if the FDA will allow telomerizing agents on to the market without a lot of hoop jumping.  Maybe the products will be introduced in Europe or Asia, instead.  

I like the super-normal vision bit.

As far as animal studies go... Geron did some for wound healing on Rabbits a couple years ago. Did exactly what they thought it would do... even took out the scarring from the cuts they made on the rabbit.

As far as the FDA... getting something cleared for topical cosmetic use is a cakewalk compared to a theraputic small-molecule drug. I hope to see this product on the shelf before I'm 40. (I'm 35 now).

Telemolecular, Sierra Sciences and Geron are all working on a telomerase skin activator. Out of the three, at least one should score.

There is MUCH more out there than meets the eye. Did you know that Alteon's ALT 7-11 has already been in use by Avon for an anti-aging skin cream? Its out already. My wife has some here in Canada. Works pretty well too!

These things ARE being worked on. The next 15-20 years should be interesting.

Kudos to you Astral, I knew L'Oreal was working on a grey hair treatment.. but I heard its realease date was between 2005-2008... so.. I guess thats on shedule too.

Side note...

Looks like we have a bit of a research project here..

Simon, any chance we can move this to a forum?

I have an idea..

Lets start an on-going thread (or section) of cosmetic treatments. That way we can see what parts of the body are affected, what kind of treatments are coming, possible release dates, and what kind of results we can expect.

Might also be able to get updates on the products as they go thru various stages of development..

Gives us all a nice research project.

Wow.. I'm on a roll..

Who can forget Anticancers work on growing hair!

http://www.anticancer.com/Dermatek_ref.html

Thank-you.... Thank-you... I'm here all week.. Please try the veal.

Simon writes, "Furthermore, we could address the subjectivity of beauty by conducting our genetic searches on a population-by-population basis. For example, we could look for beauty genes in North American models to see which correlate with the current North American beauty ideal."

Certainly a good idea but, it might still have under-representation by some poorer parts of the world who can't afford the technology and who aren't a large enough market to lure outside companies in to do it for them.

But aside from that caution, at least you're addressing the cultural and subjective aspects of human beauty in addition to the broad stroked genetic aspects.

Also I think that Webglee raises some very good points that the genetic aspects of something as broad and multifaceted as beauty will be a very hard subject (But of course not impossible) to analyze and manipulate.

I think beauty (comliness, handsomeness, etc.) is mostly and merely a physical thing and should remain under the broad tent of "physical abilities." Someone should just start a thread on the subject there. That's all it takes.

I suppose if we think about the very vague subject of charisma. It's definitely more than just physical stuff.

The great leaders of the world, both men and women, young and old, were not always beautiful but had a certain way of behaving, of projecting, of connecting with crowds. That's obviously a mental thing, group empathy, confidence, oratory, comedic timing, pose and so on. That's all mental.

Ugh. Just had a disturbing vision of a pill that warps your brain to give you the confidence, zeal, pose, timing and magnifying presence of a skilled orator. The unavoidable drawback is that it also gives you sociopathy. Hitler in convenient pill form.

How about the title "on becoming angels" or "becoming gods and angels"?

Interesting that something so 'mere' as physical beauty could launch a thousand ships, inspire poets and artists across centuries, initiate limerance, etc., etc.  Did anyone bother to consider the Ancient Greeks use of "horaios"?

Alexander the Great was said to be quite handsome and have a naturally sweet odor about him, I think.  I believe there are also references to him having golden hair.  He had an unnaturally high charisma and command bearing.  Perhaps he was a super-being of some sort: a genetic freak, or merely vacationing from another dimension in human form.

I thought of another tech reference: it is now possible, though very expensive [tens of thousands $$$ per tooth and perhaps yet to be proven in humans], to grow new teeth--3rd, 4th, 5th sets of teeth.

I am very sorry to say that there is a high probability of Telomolecular going bust if the only thing they can offer is a cosmetic cream based in telomer repair/maintenance.
Telomer shortening is not some disgusting process that Satan put into our bodies to make them age and die. Telomere shortening is a life saving device that prevent aberrant cells to go out of control.
If we remove this control without doing anything else, we will elevate enormously the frequency of malignancies. For sure we will have better wound healing, and this may reflect a niche market for that product, but the price would be too high for being used as a cosmetic cream.
The telomerase problem is a very good example of the delicate processes that are running silently inside us. We are the product of many cycles of evolutionary refinement. We are sat on a nice hill of the fitness landscape. Of course, we are not in the absolute maximum, neither we are in any of the many local maxima that represent highly desired situations (e.g., we don't grow limbs when we get the original severed). But we are in a local maximum, so we should keep in mind that most single target interventions (aka, quick fixes, no matter which technology is involved) were probably tried and discarded by the blind watchmaker many years ago.
I am very optimistic about our future prospects as a species, and I do believe that our generation has a chance to reap enormous rewards from the technologies that are emerging, but things are far more difficult to get done than what it seems by reading press releases of cash hungry startups.

"Perhaps [Alexander] was a super-being of some sort: a genetic freak, or merely vacationing from another dimension in human form"

Unlikely.

What makes him remarkable was that he was an ordinary joe who happened to be born in the right time and place and who had the smarts to take advantage of it.

The Persian Empire was in deep decline. The Greeks were in disarray after the Pelopponesian War. Egypt was likewise a spent force militarily and economically. The Greeks had spent the last few centuries revolutionizing infantry and naval technology; this, in addition to other factors, is what helped them keep the Persians out for so many centuries. Into this complex vacuum stepped Alexander.

The same could be said for Napoleon. We mustn't forget that the era makes the figure just as much as the figure makes the era.

Mr. Farlops:"Unlikely. What makes him remarkable was that he was an ordinary joe who happened to be born in the right time and place and who had the smarts to take advantage of it."

------------------------------------------------

Hmm. Whom to believe?  

At twelve years of age Alexander tamed a horse no other man could ride.

Arrian wrote, ""Not even to me it seems possible that without divine intervention he turned out to be similar to no other human being."  "Alexander the Great Similar to No Other Human Being": http://www.greece.org/themis/macedonia/article1en.htm

photo image:
http://1stmuse.com/album/portrait/alex16.jpg