Genetic Engineering

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

What is your view of genetic engineering / manipulation?

This could cover anything from insulin production to designer babies.

As a buddhist Im not sure what to make of it, perhaps it means we are taking control of the evolution of our consiousness.

I talked to my Catholic father about it and he was dead set against it which I didnt understand because: (deep breath)

If God designed and created every one of us then must have built this natural design function, DNA, into us. He also must have known that we would eventually reach a point in our development where we woulkd discover our DNA and become able to manipulate it. It is therefore my opinion that if there is a God, he must want us to take control of our physical form and control the future of our evolution.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

So what does everyone think?

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, ATF!

Oh boy oh boy oh boy! Goody goody goody!

I think you have opened a door to what could be a very interesting discussion.

On one hand, humanity has been manipulating stock by selective breeding for thousands of years. One could even say, intentional or not, that humanity has even done so to humans. Afterall, traditionally do we not prefer to "procreate" with those we deem most like ourselves, especially if our range of travel is limited? There are certainly exceptions, such as sailors and soldiers travelling far and wide, and the subjugation of the vanquished. But by and large, especially in times of peace among the comparative majority, "pure breds" are preferred. At least until recent times.

Now, on the other hand, I think what you are getting at is direct laboratory manipulation at the genome level. A la "GATTACA." And this poses some serious challenges yet for our current technologies. A lot of people are quick to note the success of Dolly the sheep. But was that truly a success story? Please note that Dolly had to be put down at a rather young age, in what should have been the prime of her life, because she was riddled with arthritis, or so we are told. So the technology, in my opinion, is not sufficiently developed for use yet in humans. I am of the opinion that in trying to resolve one problem (pick any specific problem in human genetics) we may actually be creating other problems far worse. But my greatest concern is in the source of genetic material. It makes no sense to me, to use what is potential humans lives (*note, plural) to save only one human. The math does not add up, in destoying many for the sake of one. Now, alternate sources are available for genetic material, stem cells, from adult human and cadaver sources, and umbilical cord blood, that I do not have these issues with. If the source for the stem cells is from a source without the moral dilemma, then the only objection I have is that I mentioned of proceeding with caution, understanding that the technology is as of yet flawed and insufficient. As with organ transplants, rejection is a serious problem, so a genetic match is required to draw from. It remains to be seen if genetic manipulation can actually solve some of the problems the technology promises, according to Francis Collins, the head honcho for the US government team that catalogued the genetic blueprint for humans.

Perhaps one of the biggest concerns I have seen raised is that of creating a (race/breed/variety) of "super" humans, potentially as warriors.

It will be interesting to see what others have to say in this matter.

[Bandit]

it is one of those things about science & technology that makes me sick. i would like to see life remain what it was intended to be.

if i could have my way, i would take all the people who do it & want to do it & stick them inside of human pickle jars. drill two little holes in the lid &...
& play the KJV on a reel to reel until they have it memorized.

that is what i think.

[brucegdc]

Originally Posted by Bandit

it is one of those things about science & technology that makes me sick. i would like to see life remain what it was intended to be.

Ok, here's a set of questions for you then...

Do you wear glasses? Contacts?
Have you had your appendix removed? Any surgery?
Do you eat food?
Wear silk, cotton, or almost any fabric other than leather?

All of these are changes from "what life intended them to be" - they're either artificial changes, or the result of a long process of selection and modification of plants and animals. This is merely a different method of doing so.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by brucegdc

Ok, here's a set of questions for you then...

Do you wear glasses? Contacts?
Have you had your appendix removed? Any surgery?
Do you eat food?
Wear silk, cotton, or almost any fabric other than leather?

All of these are changes from "what life intended them to be" - they're either artificial changes, or the result of a long process of selection and modification of plants and animals. This is merely a different method of doing so.

none of that has anything to do with this. justify & make it sound good however you want.

have you ever been in a human pickle jar?
that is my science project & you go in pickle jar #1.

[Quahom1]

Putting morality aside for a moment, I'd like to point out one small problem, a large supply of genetic material requirment.

Since we can't "switch" the sequences off and/or on in every strand of DNA that resides in a developed body, we have to catch it while there is only one strand of DNA. That is in the embryonic state (preferrably less than 100 cells).

Which of course means that eggs are needed (about a thousand for each potentially viable embryo). Out of 100 potetially viable embros, only one is good enough to survive beyond the embryonic state, let alone mature into a post partem life form. Since a woman has the eggs and the average woman only has about 200,000 eggs, you're gonna need a whole lot of "volunteers" (about 200,000,000), to have their eggs harvested (which can render a woman sterile).

Eh, where are we going to come up with 200,000,000 female volunteers?

v/r

Q

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Putting morality aside for a moment, I'd like to point out one small problem, a large supply of genetic material requirment.

Since we can't "switch" the sequences off and/or on in every strand of DNA that resides in a developed body, we have to catch it while there is only one strand of DNA. That is in the embryonic state (preferrably less than 100 cells).

Which of course means that eggs are needed (about a thousand for each potentially viable embryo). Out of 100 potetially viable embros, only one is good enough to survive beyond the embryonic state, let alone mature into a post partem life form. Since a woman has the eggs and the average woman only has about 200,000 eggs, you're gonna need a whole lot of "volunteers" (about 200,000,000), to have their eggs harvested (which can render a woman sterile).

Eh, where are we going to come up with 200,000,000 female volunteers?

v/r

Q

You lost me on that one Q. What do we need 200,000,000 female volunteers for? To get one genetically eningeered human? Not following your logic here.

lunamoth

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

You lost me on that one Q. What do we need 200,000,000 female volunteers for? To get one genetically eningeered human? Not following your logic here.

lunamoth

Eh, sorry. I should have continued the analysis. Because this is trial and error (with lots of errors right now), a woman who had all of her eggs harvested, might produce 200 viable embryos. Of those 200 embryos, two might make it to post partem development (baby outside the womb), using the current technology. I don't mean invitro here. I mean clearing the egg of all original genetic material, and introducing the engineered material.

It is estimated that currently 4oo,ooo,ooo viable embryos are needed to maintain the kind of experimentation science wants to do to perfect this research. Of the 400,000,000 viable embryos, it is estimated that 400 will succeed into an adult, without genetic disorders. Your "supermen" if you will.

So, in order to create 400 supermen, 200,000,000 females will possibly go sterile, giving up 200,000 eggs each, of which only 200 embryos will result (per woman), and of those 200 embryos, only two will be live births (per woman). Of those two live births times 200,000,000, there will be 400,000,000 children. But only 400 of those children will grow into adulthood, as genetically altered humans (clones perhaps), with no defects.

The math is simply wrong. The cost does not justify the results.

Plus my question originally was, where are we going to get 200,000,000 volunteers to give up all of their eggs, just to begin the process?

Once again I do not mean invitro fertilization. I mean genetically engineered material being put into an empty egg.

v/r

Q

[lunamoth]

OK, now I see where you are going.

First, I do not support the creation of human embyros for research purposes so the whole scenario as you put it would be out of the question IMV.

Second, the immediate question with respect to human genetic engineering is not the creation of superhumans, but to cure genetic disease. Fixing broken genes is a lot different from putting together new suites of genes for improving things like intelligence, athleticism, and courage. We are no where near understanding the genetics of such complex traits. So even 400 million volunteers would not be sufficient.

Third, if such research is to advance it might find its volunteers among couples who face issues of infertility or genetic disease and for whom this type of research offers their only hope of having a healthy biological child. More darkly, it would find "volunteers" from among the less fortunate people who need the money it pays to survive.

I am not a fan of human genetic modification. My nephew has cystic fibrosis, a genetic disease that leaves him with many complications and most likely a shortened life span (it makes me tear up just to type that). There are genetic treatments that do not involve the use of embryos or embryo research to alleviate his condition. Hopefully there are more being developed. The simplest thing I can think of that could be done for recessive genetic diseases such as his would be to use in virto fertilization and "sort out" the eggs carrying the recessive gene prior to fertilization. But even this option would have meant my dear nephew would not have been in the world. No, I am not a fan of human genetic modification.

lunamoth

[Quahom1]

His spirit is whole. It's his body that is broken. Perfect the body and lose the soul...interesting concept.


v/r

Q

[Bandit]

shew! Lunamoth...i thought for a minute i was going to have to stick you into human pickle jar #2.


i think we are doing just fine the way we all are. i know some people seem sad & it seems not fair.
i dont really need to be a superhuman or live on mars, just because they say so. & i dont want to see feet where ears are supposed to go & for fear that the next set of superhumans might be even less fortunate than what we could ever imagine.

But you know Q- we could use all the people in favor as the volunteers & never let them out of there pickle jars.

just a thought

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Bandit

shew! Lunamoth...i thought for a minute i was going to have to stick you into human pickle jar #2.


i think we are doing just fine the way we all are. i know some people seem sad & it seems not fair.
i dont really need to be a superhuman or live on mars, just because they say so. & i dont want to see feet where ears are supposed to go & for fear that the next set of superhumans might be even less fortunate than what we could ever imagine.

But you know Q- we could use all the people in favor as the volunteers & never let them out of there pickle jars.

just a thought

Ah yes, but my point is that you will not find 200,000,000 "volunteers" for this research, yet they need that much genetic material in order to make this work...so where are they going to get the genetic material from?

v/r

Q

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Ah yes, but my point is that you will not find 200,000,000 "volunteers" for this research, yet they need that much genetic material in order to make this work...so where are they going to get the genetic material from?

v/r

Q

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.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by Bandit

shew! Lunamoth...i thought for a minute i was going to have to stick you into human pickle jar #2.


i think we are doing just fine the way we all are. i know some people seem sad & it seems not fair.
i dont really need to be a superhuman or live on mars, just because they say so. & i dont want to see feet where ears are supposed to go & for fear that the next set of superhumans might be even less fortunate than what we could ever imagine.

But you know Q- we could use all the people in favor as the volunteers & never let them out of there pickle jars.

just a thought

Well, you might have to save a pickle jar for me, Bandit, because strictly speaking I do support funding for many types of genetic modification research. I object specifically to research that requires the use of intentionally created and aborted human embryos. I take everything else on a case by case basis. I also think we don't know anywhere near enough about human biology, behavior, and psychology to attempt genetic engineering of people.

peace,
lunamoth

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Well, you might have to save a pickle jar for me, Bandit, because strictly speaking I do support funding for many types of genetic modification research. I object specifically to research that requires the use of intentionally created and aborted human embryos. I take everything else on a case by case basis. I also think we don't know anywhere near enough about human biology, behavior, and psychology to attempt genetic engineering of people.

peace,
lunamoth

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