Green Light for Human/Animal Hybrids 292
Henneshoe writes "BBC News is reporting that two research facilities have been given the green light to create part human, part animal embryos. According the the report, 'Scientists want to create hybrid embryos by merging human cells with animal eggs in a bid to extract stem cells. The embryos would then be destroyed within 14 days.' The decision to allow the embryos was made after research showed that people in large are OK with the idea."
I can hear the excuses already... (Score:5, Funny)
"Your Honour, I was just working on creating a Human/Sheep hybrid."
Re:I can hear the excuses already... (Score:4, Funny)
At least this way the sheep aren't nervous.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I can hear the excuses already... (Score:5, Funny)
You did remind me of the story my uncle told me about the time he was on the farm with an Australian businessman. Coming over the brow of the hill on the tractor he saw a sheep with its head stuck between the wires in the fence, so being a true New Zealander he did what you suggested - attempted to make a human / sheep hybrid.
When he hopped back on the tractor he said to the Australian "Hey mate, do you want to have a go?" And before he could say anthing more the Australian businessman got down off the tractor, walked over to the sheep and
Stuck his head through the wires.
Re:I can hear the excuses already... (Score:5, Funny)
Q. How does a New Zealander find a sheep in the tall grass?
A. Very satisfying.
Re:I can hear the excuses already... (Score:5, Funny)
A: So the sheep don't hear a zipper.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Please, won't someone think of the glow-in-the-dark kitties?
Re:I can hear the excuses already... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I can hear the excuses already... This, hot on (Score:2)
Re: Human Sheep Hybrid (Score:2)
Ridiculously Misleading Article Title (Score:5, Informative)
I find this incredibly irritating. The specifics of the term "hybrid" are not elaborated upon and the continual use of the term"human-animal hybrid" allows for people to develop the notion that scientists out there are actually creating some monster chimeric creature.
Not. True. If you click on "Q&A Hybrid Embryos", found in the right hand nav bar, you'll see what I mean. I've provided the link below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6233415.stm [bbc.co.uk]
This second link elaborates on why these eggs are considered "hybrid". Genetic material (DNA) is essentially removed from animal cells, leaving an empty nucleus and functional cellular machinery. In other words, you have a cell without DNA that looks very much like a human cell without it's DNA. The scientists then inject human DNA into the animal cell's nucleus; at this point the animal cell reads instructions off the DNA and carries them out. The end product is essentially A HUMAN CELL, but with left over proteins and cellular material generated from the old animal DNA.
This is FAR different from what people appear to be assuming. It's not going to generate some half cow-half human monster/creature, and does NOT "blur" the boundaries between humans and other species.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I hear you. It is disgusting that people badmouth these scientist who are in reality working hard to create human-cat hybrids [wikipedia.org] to star in live action versions of japanese anime shows.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sweet! (Score:4, Funny)
People in Iarge? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This is how it starts. First it's embryos, then they're in larging people.
Re:People in Iarge? More imPORTantly... (Score:2)
(And, will their entry into the world mark them as greenhorns?)
people in large are OK (Score:5, Insightful)
I am glad that we are trusting the unwashed masses to make important technical decisions that they know nothing about. If Britney says it's safe, then it must be. God bless Democracy.
I, for one, welcome our species hopping virus overlords.
Re:people in large are OK (Score:5, Informative)
Even the summary, once you get past that horrid title, makes it clear that we're not talking about changing the DNA involved, but rather using eggs from animals to grow cells that were taken from a human. I can't really imagine why I'd have a problem with growing cells from a human that way vs. previous experiments that have cultured human cells in a stand-alone environment.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, maybe they should just ask us experts at slashdot for our opinions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the "unwashed masses" that protest most - people with no clue, no understanding, loaded with prejudices and unwilling to learn - and they can be a serious roadblock. After all, a vote of a scientist is worth the same as a vote of a redneck, but there's 1000 rednecks for each sci
Re: (Score:2)
What if? How would people react if one of these scientists allowed a chimera to be born?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
paging... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bzzzzzzzzz (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Secondly, these scientists aren't trying to invent teleportation, they're trying to extract stem cells. Teleportation (and giant flies) are another department.
Public Permission? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why even create such a government body if they were just going to conduct opinion polls to make their decisions? If you are going to assemble a panel of scientists and ethicists to regulate the scientific community (well at least in the UK), at least you would hope they would use their expertise instead of referring to the public.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In a perfect world, maybe.
Back in the real world, enough irrational protest can prevent valuable research from occurring - and leave the related commercial sector scraping by with dysfunctional, archaic, and dangerous technology. For a good example, see nuclear power in
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This really has to be one of the few times I've seen someone argue for LESS public input here on
Re:Public Permission? (Score:5, Insightful)
Public money spent on things the public wants is what charity organizations are for. Spending money on things for the good of the people, but that is something the average person wouldnt want to pay for himself, is what the government is for.
Re: (Score:2)
--
"What we have in this country is socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor"
-Gore Vidal
Re: (Score:2)
Actually yes, I agree with our founding fathers that the purpose of our government is to take care of its people. I also agree with our founding fathers that the average person often does not know what is the best course of action. Deciding what is for "the good of the people" is the domain of the government. Voting is the mechanism by which the average people try to insure that the people running the government have si
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In the United States, governmental authority and sovereignty rests with the "public". Presumably, their perceptions guide their exercising of their power.
I have always found the issue of sovereignty a bit strange in the United Kingdom. In the end, the law either derives from the people or the monarch. In either case, a panel of scientists is irrelevant as they do not exercise political power, at least not beyond
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree. Are you saying that your average southern plantation owner should have been consulted in 1800 about the ethics of slavery?
I personally think that the public should be the absolute last result as an arbitrator of ethical issues. The public is often vastly uninformed on most topics. I honestly think that an ethicist, or at least someone with enormous experience and training in dealing with ethica
Suddenly... (Score:5, Funny)
better late than never (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, and the obligatory "I for one welcome our new <insert your own human/animal hybrid here> overlords."
And because China does it it's good? (Score:2)
Creating chimeras? (Score:2)
Awww... (Score:5, Insightful)
So, anyone else consider that the single most dissapointing part of this?
They'd almost certainly not live long enough to ever call them infants, but even in the steps they do last through, we could learn so much by watching how they develop differently from either human or other-half embryos.
And if they actually lived to term, well, I would consider their cognitive develpment nothing short of fascinating to observe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
New Species? Bos Sapiens... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, because all those past, wise societies, spent SO much time thinking about the possible consequences of inventing the space shuttle, the atomic bomb, airplanes, ships, siege weapons, vaccines, indoor plumbing, the wheel, and fire.
I'll never understand this sort of mindset. If it were up to you, we'd still be painting mammoths o
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that we didn't "INVENT" biology, it invented us. Because of that, it is very likely that there might be some things going on in there that we have no clue about.
But, by all means, please, don't let a little concern stop you. After all, your little example of the atom bomb turned out completely benign, so no worries.
Full speed ahead!
*Pulls train whistle
Choo! Choo!
Re: (Score:2)
We didn't invent fire, metal, nuclear reactions, or bacterial organisms either, we just learned how to harness and use them to our advantage. What makes biology any different?
Oh, yeah, we knew EVERYTHING about fire before we started using it. Gotcha. Thanks for the input.
Re: (Score:2)
Scientists will probably be our undoing this way. They never wonder IF they should do something, since they only care about HOW they should do something.
Planet of the Apes (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Planet of the Apes (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How is this better? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How is this better? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
While an affront to God may at first seem worse, you have to realize that there are more scientists who don't believe in God than there are who don't believe that they're human.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:How is this better? (Score:5, Insightful)
In the eyes of religion, the human egg and the human sperm are considered potential humans, even more so when joined. Hence the reason it is considered sinful when a man "spills his seed".
Except for the reproductive cells, any other human cell cannot be considered a potential human, therefore using some skin cells and implanting them in a cow egg and aborting the fetus after 14 days would not be considered human abortion.
Basically this is a loophole around the whole ethics thing as long as the fetus is terminated. A whole new bag of worms is waiting to be opened if one of those embryos goes to term and a 8lb 10oz bouncing blue eyed huvine (boman?) is born.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, maybe a lot of scientists are furries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom [wikipedia.org]
Bring it! (Score:2)
Man, this sounds very fun. I have no clue what they'd create in beyond the 14 days (very unlikely to survive anyway) - the idea that there will be a generation of scientists experienced with work like this is exciting!
In some years from now, some regime will pay for the experiments to continue the 14 growth into longer periods, perhaps drilling a way towards useful organs. I seriously doubt a full creature could ever result - really. But I'd certainly like to be able to graft on a tail th
Island (Score:4, Interesting)
I have a hunch that some lab tech would end up with a private Island of Doctor Moreau in their garage, via a few test tubes that were somehow misplaced at the lab.
Dan East
I'd have been... (Score:2)
I'm o.k. with having pigs and other animals genetically engineered to grow ideal human organs for transplant into humans. I could care less about the animal. I'm also o.k. with vat like bacteria/yeast making various human hormones and other things. I don't care about animals of other species being mass slaughtered for our benefit. I eat at McDonald's every day so I enjoy th
Green light? (Score:2)
I for one... (Score:3, Funny)
Especially if they are in Neko Mimi Mode [animegalleries.net].
Manbearpig (Score:4, Funny)
Better call Al Gore.
Re: (Score:2)
The implications are clear: (Score:2, Funny)
But he used the monkey to do it
Apes in the plan
Were all here to prove it
I can walk like an ape
Talk like an ape
I can do what a monkey can do
God made man
But a monkey supplied the glue
-JOCKO HOMO
TFA didn't mention... (Score:3, Funny)
Validates the Religious Right (Score:5, Insightful)
Well now those critics have been validated, and the Religious Right has more ammunition with which they can stall actual valid medical research.
This is what unrestrained morbid curiosity gets you. Too bad productive science as a whole has to suffer.
Timely photo from the fringe: Dog / human hybrid? (Score:2)
Suggestion (Score:2)
"From the Department of Dr. Moreau"
As long as they don't do it on an island (Score:2)
I can see it now... (Score:2)
Gives a whole new meaning to the word "furry".
Not kawaii... (Score:2)
Just as usual. (Score:3, Interesting)
Can be a creepy result... A sheep with a human brain... Or the opposite... Those are extremes...
But what about a human with polar bear fur?
Never mind - there are better features that I would have had... Better eyesight maybe? Birds are able to see UV-radiation, and some birds have a lot better vision than humans. On the other hand the genome for UV isn't lost in humans - it's actually changed into blue instead, probably because it's more useful that way. (so we can see the BSOD from M$)
Or a simple feature - why does humans really need toilet paper? Most animals can keep themselves clean anyway!
And the XXX industry would like to have a man hung like a horse...
And the athletes would like to be able to run like a cheetah.
But don't forget - humans are actually one of the more adaptable species in the world, even if laziness and sex drive are the most prominent features of a human. (don't underestimate the amount of work a human can do to avoid work later...)
Better mileage? (Score:2)
Correction: "human/non-human embryos" (Score:2)
Re:Green light for animal cruelty (Score:5, Insightful)
Because 14-day-old embryos have such well-developed nervous systems that they can appreciate (nevermind even "experience") pain?
Do you know how many embryos are going to be destroyed
No. Do you?
More importantly - So what? At that stage of life, you have organic scum in a tube. What it could someday turn into has no relevance to its status at that developmental level.
There are better ways to get stem cells people.
Yes - Yes, we do indeed have better ways. But the goddamned fundies don't seem inclined to let us use the numerous extra embryos from human fertility therapies (nevermind abortions), so we need to find new, even more absurd, ways to get them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Until somebody INEVITABLY allows such an embryo to develop. What then?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes - Yes, we do indeed have better ways. But the goddamned fundies don't seem inclined to let us use the numerous extra embryos from human fertility therapies (nevermind abortions), so we need to find new, even more absurd, ways to get them.
I don't know that I'd say absurd. If we can get stem cells and appease the religious nuts at the same time without spending appreciably more money, then go for it. Most arguments against stem cell research are based on the idea that we're experimenting with "human lif
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So, it is not cruel when one does not "appreciate" or "experience" pain? You could then sedate a person to the point of being incapable of doing either in order to morally kill them?
Blah blah blah. (Score:2)
If you truly believe that a few cells bound together are capable of experiencing cruelty, then how do you go through your day? If you sneeze you're killing more cells than that. I certainly hope you're a vegan, but even there, how do you bear the sufferings of all the vegetables?
In your world menstruation is murder, and masturbation is genocide, so why don't you go crusade against porn or something?
Re: (Score:2)
The lack of pain makes it far more civil than it would be. This should be a goal for all but the most basic of creatures; most people have a problem with tearing the wings off a fly, and so it makes reasonable sense to not cause any more pain than necessary, and if the pain is too extreme for the ben
Re:Green light for animal cruelty (Score:5, Interesting)
Somehow you seem more horrified that those 10,000 die to provide embryos (which you so clearly point out can be used to ease human suffering) than the millions upon millions of animals that die every year to feed us (inefficiently, from a calorie viewpoint), or the thousands of animals which get tested on.
Why people care so much about things which are never self-aware, let alone capable of feeling pain, yet turn a blind eye to the suffering of people (and animals) that is very real astounds me. Darfur? No, you're more outraged about stem cell research.
You can have moral issues with both, but please get your priorities straight. Hundreds of thousands dying and starving for NO good reason compared to cells with hundreds of deaths that were going to happen anyway (abortion isn't going away, even if made illegal) that may alleviate the suffering of millions.
Re: (Score:2)
As for the rich getting better medical care than the poor, this has always been the case, always will be. However, in many countries, the poorer get a minimum amount of health care, and if significant advances are made using stem cells, those people would benefit as well.
Re: (Score:2)
no it's not, not by any stretch of imagination...well, except you and a few deluded others.
"Do you know how many embryos are going to be destroyed, and how many animals are going to be sacrificed to get said embryos, in order to do this ridiculous research?"
No, and the research isn't ridiculous, it's needed.
"...but I fear
That explains your emotional reaction and lack of actual logic."
"he rich living forever."
Why is that bad? It's not like when they die the mo
Some people are never satisfied (Score:2)
What, one Steve Ballmer [youtube.com] isn't enough for you?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
There already are UK furry conventions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There already are UK furry conventions (Score:5, Funny)
No.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Don't be too hasty, now... I've heard that throwing rocks is a great reliever of stress, and and excellent source of exercise!
Re: (Score:2)