Genetic Engineering

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Bandit

so you want to do it just a different way?
i have a way to try but i am not saying.
case by case, hmmm.. i will get back to you. until then,
down you go into the pickle jar

Hi Bandit, well, trying to save myself from the jar I will clarify what I said. No, I do not support the creation of genetically modified people except when it can be done to cure an unavoidable genetic disease and then only if if can be done without sacrificing other fetuses/fertilized eggs. Pretty slim conditions and not technologically feasible at this time.

And I also recognize that the category of genetic engineering is very broad and includes lots of things that affect your life every day, right down to the cereal in your bowl.

peace,
lunamoth

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Bandit

inside there minds?
in the meantime they just keep messing with mice, because what is given to us is never good enough for some.

there will always be a Dr Jekyll.

It ain't mice they want to change...

My point is, if I were less concerned with man as he is and more concerned with creating a super race, I'd go where there is desperation, in order to get the eggs I needed...poor overcrowded countries with governments willing to subject their own for a few dollars, and no questions asked.

Wouldn't happen? Think Nazi Germany in 1942...

v/r

Q

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

It ain't mice they want to change...

My point is, if I were less concerned with man as he is and more concerned with creating a super race, I'd go where there is desperation, in order to get the eggs I needed...poor overcrowded countries with governments willing to subject their own for a few dollars, and no questions asked.

Wouldn't happen? Think Nazi Germany in 1942...

v/r

Q

yah. some are thinking the 'lesser' races. it is sick. not sure what you mean by it is not mice because that is exactly what they are changing amongst the others of the creation. i will never be in favor of a hybrid human OR animal. the president will veto there frozen embryos. this is not just about curing disease & test tube babies any more. there animal/human gene mixing will get out & we will be looking at another world plague/virus...etc
you already know what i think about it all & i am not changing my mind.
Pickle Jar!

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Hi Bandit, well, trying to save myself from the jar I will clarify what I said. No, I do not support the creation of genetically modified people except when it can be done to cure an unavoidable genetic disease and then only if if can be done without sacrificing other fetuses/fertilized eggs. Pretty slim conditions and not technologically feasible at this time.

And I also recognize that the category of genetic engineering is very broad and includes lots of things that affect your life every day, right down to the cereal in your bowl.

peace,
lunamoth

Luna are you thinking along the lines of muscular dystrophy, Parkinson, Alzheimer & things like that?
the same way we did with polio?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Bandit

yah. some are thinking the 'lesser' races. it is sick. not sure what you mean by it is not mice because that is exactly what they are changing amongst the others of the creation. i will never be in favor of a hybrid human OR animal. the president will veto there frozen embryos. this is not just about curing disease & test tube babies any more. there animal/human gene mixing will get out & we will be looking at another world plague/virus...etc
you already know what i think about it all & i am not changing my mind.
Pickle Jar!

Rodents are legal to work on...humans are not...yet.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Rodents are legal to work on...humans are not...yet.

i know but that is not what i am saying. creating something NEW from what has already been given to use. they are not just working 'with' any more.
i have seen enough hollywood sci fi to know what is in peoples minds.


i am testing out my emoticons. this one is called puke

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Bandit

i know but that is not what i am saying. creating something NEW from what has already been given to use. they are not just working 'with' any more.
i have seen enough hollywood sci fi to know what is in peoples minds.


i am testing out my emoticons. this one is called puke

Nice work...you genetically engineer that yourself?

oy...where is the dramamene...

v/r

Q

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Bandit

Luna are you thinking along the lines of muscular dystrophy, Parkinson, Alzheimer & things like that?
the same way we did with polio?

Hi Bandit,

Well, I am thinking in terms of healing, not in terms of enhancing.

Polio is caused by a virus and vaccine technology is not the same as genetic engineering. Diseases that are due to defective genes, such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia, or diseases that have a large genetic component, (which I believe could include Alzheimers and MD and MS, but I'm not fully read up on those conditions) may be treatable by gene therapy. Q was talking about altering DNA in the egg or early stages after fertilization, but gene therapy does not necessarily involve this approach. For example, progress has been made in treating the breathing problems associated with cystic fibrosis using recombinant rhino viruses (the viruses that cause colds). So, genetic engineering is involved but it does not mean altering the germ line (egg and sperm) cells of the patient.

However, as Q pointed out, the technology for altering human DNA in the egg/embryo is ever advancing. For a long time it was thought that it would be impossible to clone animals, yet now it is becoming increasingly more common. However, I do not agree with human cloning nor with enhancing of human genomes (vanity, superhuman, etc), and even with respect to healing I think it is unethical (for multiple reasons, but primarily because it involves research on human zygotes, which is unacceptable to me).

I hope I'm not confusing you. Simply put, there are some types of genetic engineering that do not involve altering/sacrificing human zygotes and on a case by case basis I may support that type of endeavor. The term genetic engineering is a catch-all phrase that includes many many many types of research on all different species (bateria, plants, animals). If someone wants to villanize a new biotechnology all they need to do is label it GE and there will be a whole lot of backlash against it, even if it has nothing to do with human or animals at all. ATF mentioned the production of insulin, which can be done by genetically engineered bacteria. I mentioned your cereal. If you eat corn then chances are you have eaten genetically engineered corn.

There are lots of ethical questions related to each of these types of research and I am far far from giving my blanket assent to any one of them. Some ethics are related to the environment, some to business practices that end up hurting developing countries, and some to appropriate allocation of resources. And some of my reservations are based upon the sanctity of life and respect for God's creation.

But, we are called to heal and to feed people. If GE offers a way to do this within ethical guidelines, I am not going to rule it completely out.

Hey, thanks for the chance to say all this.

peace,
lunamoth

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Hi Bandit,

Well, I am thinking in terms of healing, not in terms of enhancing.

Polio is caused by a virus and vaccine technology is not the same as genetic engineering. Diseases that are due to defective genes, such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell anemia, or diseases that have a large genetic component, (which I believe could include Alzheimers and MD and MS, but I'm not fully read up on those conditions) may be treatable by gene therapy. Q was talking about altering DNA in the egg or early stages after fertilization, but gene therapy does not necessarily involve this approach. For example, progress has been made in treating the breathing problems associated with cystic fibrosis using recombinant rhino viruses (the viruses that cause colds). So, genetic engineering is involved but it does not mean altering the germ line (egg and sperm) cells of the patient.

However, as Q pointed out, the technology for altering human DNA in the egg/embryo is ever advancing. For a long time it was thought that it would be impossible to clone animals, yet now it is becoming increasingly more common. However, I do not agree with human cloning nor with enhancing of human genomes (vanity, superhuman, etc), and even with respect to healing I think it is unethical (for multiple reasons, but primarily because it involves research on human zygotes, which is unacceptable to me).

I hope I'm not confusing you. Simply put, there are some types of genetic engineering that do not involve altering/sacrificing human zygotes and on a case by case basis I may support that type of endeavor. The term genetic engineering is a catch-all phrase that includes many many many types of research on all different species (bateria, plants, animals). If someone wants to villanize a new biotechnology all they need to do is label it GE and there will be a whole lot of backlash against it, even if it has nothing to do with human or animals at all. ATF mentioned the production of insulin, which can be done by genetically engineered bacteria. I mentioned your cereal. If you eat corn then chances are you have eaten genetically engineered corn.

There are lots of ethical questions related to each of these types of research and I am far far from giving my blanket assent to any one of them. Some ethics are related to the environment, some to business practices that end up hurting developing countries, and some to appropriate allocation of resources. And some of my reservations are based upon the sanctity of life and respect for God's creation.

But, we are called to heal and to feed people. If GE offers a way to do this within ethical guidelines, I am not going to rule it completely out.

Hey, thanks for the chance to say all this.

peace,
lunamoth

i just wish the others were thinking the same way & i know they are not because i read & listen & they sound 'mad' to me. honestly, i am not even for the GE of farm animals or any of that because i see it as an abuse for the mighty dollar & we dont know for sure what that may do over time or if something gets out of hand. i am not even for microwaved food- but i know i cant change it or stop it.
i think of the plant life too & so often it reverts back to one or the other of the original colors or specie, or does not come back.

I know vaccine & medicine is different than this.

it bothers me because i know for every good thing it will be abused & turned into something bad by someone & i feel this may be turned into a very serious bad for the future of everyone. I could say a lot.
What was ethical & considered a true value 30 years ago is almost oboslete today & i know i can't bring it back.

i can't help it that i see things differently.

I also hear you on the Faith, Certainty and Understanding thread.
Thanks for listening to me too.

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

I see there are some pretty strong opinions on this topic. Bandit, you say that you are even against GE in farming. What if I could genetically modify a type of corn that had high heat tolerance and needed very little water, this corn could grow easily in African countries which are so often struck with drought and famine. Would you be against that?

My brother is a microbiologist, he is currently working with a big biotech company manipulating DNA in bacteria to produce a vaccine for a well know chemical weapon. I think its all a bit hush-hush so I wont go into detail, but the end product could be used to protect soldiers and/or civilians from chemical attacks.

And no one has really answered my main point yet, does anyone think that God might have given us this ability to manipulate ourselves and our environment deliberatly?

[alexa]

*huge sigh. I'll find myself into that Pickle Jar Bandit keeps talking about*

If medicine can help having sane babies by gene therapy (i.e no insuline or digestive enzyme deficiency or other hereditary diseases), I'll say : why not ? And if we can get a type of corn (or other plant) able to feed people in African continent, I'll say it's worth doing it.

As luna said before me, I am pro gene therapy in certain conditions and against creation of babies in function of their parents desires.

ATW my answer to your question is yes.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

My brother is a microbiologist, he is currently working with a big biotech company manipulating DNA in bacteria to produce a vaccine for a well know chemical weapon. I think its all a bit hush-hush so I wont go into detail, but the end product could be used to protect soldiers and/or civilians from chemical attacks.

And no one has really answered my main point yet, does anyone think that God might have given us this ability to manipulate ourselves and our environment deliberatly?

If that stuff is even a little better than Atropine and 2Pamchloride, I'm all for it! The A and 2P can be worse than the chemicals they're supposed to neutralize!

I am certain God gave us the ability to alter anything and everything ATF. Even in scripture God admits that there is nothing man can not accomplish if he puts his mind to it.

What our reasons are behind doing something, is a horse of a different color. (oh very bad pun for this thread)

v/r

Q

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, all!

Special nod to Alexa, I haven't "talked" to you in a long time, I hope you and yours are well.

I am certain God gave us the ability to alter anything and everything ATF. Even in scripture God admits that there is nothing man can not accomplish if he puts his mind to it.

Yes, but...is this not the same "spirit" behind the building and cause for destruction of the Tower of Babel? That is, humankind attempting to elevate themselves to the "position" of God?

I like the way Jeff Goldblum's character said it in the first Jurassic Park movie; "Just because we can, doesn't mean we should."

There is a lot of refinement of technique before wide application could commence. I hear that there is some research being done with nerve damage and a gentic disorder that escapes me at the moment, I want to say CF. With some modest and hopeful success. But the day of going in at a certain moment in a pregnancy and getting designer enhancements for your baby are a long way off still. Even practical application of genome therapy for disease in adults and teenagers is difficult at best, it is not nearly as simple as a vaccine, and vaccines are not that simple.

I am pleased to see so many in support of not creating life simply to destroy it. The idea of a spare parts clone in Bandit's pickle jar just waiting to give up its liver when you get done destroying your own with alcohol, is just wrong, on so many levels.

I would correct Bandit though, on a minor point, but one that draws fire from all around. Pres. Bush did not suspend research on embryonic sources. He suspended government financing, grant monies, on further research, limiting the federal grant monies to the then existing lines available. Private sources are very free to continue whatever avenues they wish, at their own expense. Any research on further lines must be privately funded as well. So the gripe is somewhat moot, in that Bush's dilemma (I looked into it for a paper in a medical ethics class) did not end research on embryonic sources, it merely curtailed it from spiralling out of control. I think it was a good decision, given the pressure from both sides. I still think more effort and research should be put into non-embryonic sources. Right here at the University of Florida there has been quite a bit of work announced to the public of research on cadaver sources, as well as bone and if I recall correctly even brain from living sources. So the entire connection to abortion could be severed with little to no ill effect on the science, other than the additional effort in extraction and application of the materials. That would severe the ethical quandary of beginning life to destroy life.

I cannot help but think that those who advocate massive scale utilization of "discarded" embryos and fetuses are looking to further entrench in the minds of the masses the worthlessness of human life, that it becomes a matter of dollars and cents. How much is your arm worth, or your kidney, or your unborn child? People will become a commodity. When that happens, I think any allusion to religion or morality as we know it will go right out the door. (Of course, I see this being rebutted by the selling of "spare parts" from executed criminals in countries like China, but I will stand by my statement until that rebuttal arises.)

[alexa]

Special smile to juantoo3. Long time indead. We are all right, thanks. I hope you didn't suffer too much because of hurricanes this year.

Things can change a lot in a hundred years. Genome therapy needs a massive amount of time and money to be developped and used. I see it in the future like any other medical treatement, more difficult to be performed, true, but not less than a therapy.

I sincerely hope we'll never see the day when people will be a commodity. I hope we'll be able to find a way to eradicate criminality, too.

I have no time to finish my idea, so I'll be back soon.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

I see there are some pretty strong opinions on this topic. Bandit, you say that you are even against GE in farming. What if I could genetically modify a type of corn that had high heat tolerance and needed very little water, this corn could grow easily in African countries which are so often struck with drought and famine. Would you be against that?

My brother is a microbiologist, he is currently working with a big biotech company manipulating DNA in bacteria to produce a vaccine for a well know chemical weapon. I think its all a bit hush-hush so I wont go into detail, but the end product could be used to protect soldiers and/or civilians from chemical attacks.

And no one has really answered my main point yet, does anyone think that God might have given us this ability to manipulate ourselves and our environment deliberatly?

Down into the pickle jar you go ATF.

i am for producing a better crop. but how much toxin to humans will there be to rid of the other toxins in this corn? is adaptedness more important than yield? is it safe over time? we dont know for sure. we just guess.
even with a drought tolerant corn, these countries would still be left poor on purpose. so i do not see that as an answer especially since there is plenty of food now to feed everyone. for decades we dumped half of it into the sea instead of sharing.

i dont know. nobody knows. i am on a taste testing board & i can tell the difference in a REAL chicken & one that has been manipulated & i know the difference in something microwaved & something cooked naturally.
the same for chemical artifical flavors & real flavors.

yes I believe God 'allows' all these things. it is the motive behind people that is not right. i see a complete lack of love for life in some of these inventions. treating people like human 'resources' instead of humans. i see a lot of manipulation that i feel is not right & not coming from God. However, i have no interest in talking to unbelievers about God.

Half of these inventions are what make people sick. Pump it into the rats watch them die, then pump it into humans.
Because man invented laser eye surgery, teflon, & viagra, which we all know has caused problems with people, does that mean we keep making it? OF COURSE!

from your description there with the soldiers & i am sure it also hush hush, like i said earlier, using what we are given & 'inventions' are two different things...
is it a honest invention or a wicked invention?
trying to create some immortal being(s) out of things that are mortal, is never going to happen but that is what many are thinking. a lot of sick minds today & i am talking a sickness for which there is no cure.
50 years later people are still suffering from nuclear waste & we keep making it. yet i find it repulsive that the answer to that would be creating humans that could tolerate WMD or be able to walk on mars with no oxygen. it is silly.
when we have to invent vaccine to protect from something else that was invented, that is not progress.

it is an inverted tower of babylon & i am not changing my mind.

ATF- you go into the king pickle jar for a very lengthy observation in my science project.