DNA So Dangerous It Doesn't Exist 454
Panaqqa writes "A group of researchers at Boise State University is investigating the theory that there are genome sequences so dangerous they are incompatible with life. Greg Hampikian, a professor of genetics, and his team are comparing all possible short sequences of nucleotides to databases of gene sequences to determine which ones don't exist in nature. The New Scientist reports that the US Department of Defense is interested enough in their work to have awarded them a $1 million grant. I for one am not sure I like the possible directions this research could take."
Hmmm... paradox? (Score:1, Insightful)
Imagine a mouse with a DNA sequence that makes it want to run into mousetraps when it reaches a certain age. Obviously something like won't have much of a chance to procreate.
Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, quite. Gene replacement therapy with ones that aren't compatible with life. At all. A project run by the US DOD. "Bound to end in tears" doesn't even start to cover it. Great.
Dave
Re:Hmmm... paradox? (Score:3, Insightful)
stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Especially stupid are searches for amino-acid sequences. Some of the sequences do not make structural sense, obviously.
And what about "dangerous"? Obviously, if the sequence is so crappy that it makes the working conformation of every structural RNA or protein disfunctional then it won't be reproduced. Never.
More interesting would be to find out why some sequences are not encountered also in non-coding areas. But "danger"???
Give me a break. This is as stupid as stupid goes.
Should read: DNA So Useless It Doesn't Exist (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A million dollars?? (Score:4, Insightful)
where do the remaining 990 000 dollars go?
Salaries to pay the PhDs to process and analyze the data and tune the software and not go to China or Russia or someone else who'd like to know more about this stuff.
Re:Exactly (Score:3, Insightful)
You are so totally right because DoD funded projects are always massive failures or horrible weapons. Oh wait... there's the Internet and OpenBSD.
Re:I though it was an other 'idea' like ID (Score:3, Insightful)
I know a word that doesn't exist... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:DoD ? (Score:5, Insightful)
1. The Internet. You are using it now. It was originally created by ARPA, now DARPA, which is part of the DoD. You can thank the need for a interconnected, wired (and unwired) network for computer systems the military was using for the "Birth of the Internet."
2. GPS. Another advance that came from a military need.
3. Computers. Not entirely DoD based, but ENIAC was built for calculating artillery firing tables for the US Army, which falls under what is now the DoD.
Those are just three I can think of pretty readily without having to go digging for information. Do they do other research into weapons? Yes. Is it all to make things more deadly? Not necessarily. It is really to make them more effective and efficient. A lot of these researches are done in an attempt to save soldiers' lives and to prevent civilian casualties. A lot of their medical research is along the same vein. If not for some dumb laws (created by the US government), I wouldn't be surprised if the DoD was dumping tons of money into stem-cell research too. Trust me, it isn't all bad.
Re:Sounds Like the Funniest Joke in the World (Score:5, Insightful)
But forensic analyses of blood has found cases well before 1969 (the earliest definite is 1959), and current research has the earliest cases at some time in the 1930's.
So no it doesn't sound like AIDS was manufactured.
Re:Sounds Like the Funniest Joke in the World (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Release to Africa and homosexuals.
3. Profit?
Seriously, let's say the US government possessed such a useless weapon as a blood-borne disease. Let's say they decided to use it. They didn't test it on prisoners or Soviets... no, they went to dirt-poor Africa and infected a bunch of folk there. And maybe they went to San Francisco and infected some gay folks, too. Then the government manages to keep this whole operation a secret and never uses this "weapon" again. The government is terrible at keeping even important things secret - to the point where they redact documents by changing their color in a PDF! Do you really think that the US government was able to develop a virus in secret, and then deploy it in secret?
That violates Occam's razor. A much simpler explanation is that AIDS evolved to exploit weaknesses in the human immune system, just as many diseases that have come before it.
Re:I though it was an other 'idea' like ID (Score:5, Insightful)
Dump the stupid agendas. If the science can't stand up then it can't stand up. If the science does stand up then it does... unless you're saying "I want to believe in randomly caused macro-evolution so much that I want to ignore scientific evidence from anyone who doesn't agree with me."
Re:I though it was an other 'idea' like ID (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:DoD ? (Score:3, Insightful)
There's nothing necessarily wrong with the DoD researching new technologies. Sure, they come up with great new inventions for both military and civilian use. It just says something about our national priorities that the only way a lot of these things could get researched is if they have some sort of potential military application.
Re:It Comes as No Surprise... (Score:3, Insightful)
The DOD funds many pieces of research without the idea that it wouold kill people.
Yes, they also fund research that kills people.
If You have been paying attention you would note that the DoD focuses on smaller strategic strikes with maximum impact.
What's the DoD hoping to find? I way to rearange someones genetic structure so the magically turn to goo? There are better, faster, cheaper, and realistic ways of actually killing someone.
You people knee jerk reaction to these articles is making me sick.
No gays in prison? (Score:1, Insightful)
Riiiiight. Because there's no homosexual activity going on in prisons at all, thus no way for a venereal disease tested on prisoners to quickly spread to the gay community.
Re:Might as well imagine shrink rays. (Score:3, Insightful)
But there are also few genetic differences between chimps and humans too, and those few differences make chimps very different from humans in our eyes.
Sure to an alien creature there might be no big difference between chimp, human or even ant - all are DNA based organisms and a subgroup of carbon based lifeforms.
But to us, there are significant differences.
Also: though the average specimens may not differ much in various parameters it's often not the average specimens of a group who are significant in many things. It's usually the ones at the extremes. Top 100 scientists, inventors, CEOs, dictators etc. The rest like you and me are just "fillers". Just a very few people own most of the wealth in the world.
So it's silly to say there's no such thing as "race". There are different breeds of dogs with different tendencies and characteristics, same species but still different. Similarly there are different human races/breeds but they are not as distinct as dog breeds - due to the breeding programs being a bit different
As for trying to wipe out a race without wiping out other races, the hybrids will probably still survive and there are plenty of hybrids. And what's the point of doing that in the first place? Humans have got to the stage where it is common for culture/religion/belief to supercede race as the most important marker.
Of course we are also getting close to the stage where a single average person can wipe out tens of thousands or even more people without having to collude with others. Currently it takes a number of people to agree to kill thousands. But if the average person gets access to more and more dangerous technologies, either the average person has to be a lot better or the paths technology takes should change.
So as technology "progresses", we should no longer be doing things merely because they can be done, we should start to spend a lot more thought on what should be done now, what might be best done later, and what might perhaps not be done at all or at least for the forseeable future.
Otherwise some idiot/nut will just push the big red "Kill Everybody" button the instant it is made.
Re:Sounds Like the Funniest Joke in the World (Score:4, Insightful)
Religious fanatics. There is a new vaccine out now for HPV that can prevent cervical cancer in women, and some religious organizations are debating whether it is "moral" for teenage girls to have the vaccine. They think the threat of getting HPV and cervical cancer may prevent girls from having premarital sex.
Re:Sounds Like the Funniest Joke in the World (Score:3, Insightful)
Take the HPV vaccine. It'll make trillions. Doesn't matter if poor people can't afford it. It'll be given out gratis because emergency rooms would rather pay $100 for a vaccine than $10k for an uninsured person with cervical cancer.
If there was a wide-range flu vaccine, employers would eagerly pay $100/dose and if it reduced sick days by even 1/year they'd save lots of money. Anyone with insurance would get it courtesy of their greedy insurance company. Anyone without insurance would get it gratis if their last-resort care providers can see the bottom-line benefit.
I know how things are. I think they can be better, for less money, and more profit if everyone would just look a bit further. Too bad they won't.