Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News Science

Australian Scientists Produce Giant Mutant Mice 195

Posted by timothy from the please-don't-do-this-with-earwigs dept.
SuperCujo writes: "Scientists in Australia have done some fun things with genetics and produced some mice that are 30-40% bigger than normal. They removed a gene from their DNA that makes the body produce a growth-inhibiting protein. Imagine these giant mice in your kitchen :)" Inhibiting an inhibitor seems like a more elegant approach than adding growth hormones to mice. The researchers say the work "may lead to developing new medicines for the treatment of growth and muscle-wasting disorders."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australian Scientists Produce Giant Mutant Mice More

Australian Scientists Produce Giant Mutant Mice

Comments Filter:
  • So, do they freak out when they see tiny l'il elephants?

  • They're just elephants painted grey with their noses rolled up. Has Timothy not seen Tom & Jerry?
  • I really hope they keep those giant mice in the labs securely in cages so they can't get out. Can you just imagine if your mother found one of these in your kitchen?. I bet the Scientists would be knocked down by the Housemothers Association if they let those mice out :P
  • This reminds me of this movie from the 80's about these giant rats that take over an entire town (the size of small dogs). If I recall, a massive flood eventually kills them all off. Which is probably worse, because who wants a town full of giant dead decaying rats?

    Of course, keep in mind that the breakthrough here is altering the growth/size -- that they're mice is purely incidental.
    ---
    seumas.com

  • Dingos (Score:1)

    by Seumas ( 6865 )
    Well, since it is Australia, perhaps they're looking for something to fend off Dingos. ;)
    ---
    seumas.com
  • Pretty soon all the whacked-out parents are going to try to genetically engineer their child. This is going to cause HUGE controversy, how is it all going to come out? Are we going to be able to clone ourselves? How about a headless clone, so I can put my 80 year old head on a 20 year old body. Can you genetically engineer your own clone? Can I give myself bigger muscles, blue eyes, etc.? We are delving deeply into the things that make us human, are we going to transform ourselves into something that is not?

    Enigma

  • Wow (Score:1)

    by Jenova ( 27902 )
    Imagine a use for uh.... cosmetic enhancements!
    :)
  • I remember seeing Sylvester from Looney tunes trying to teach his nephew how to catch a mouse. A box fell out of a truck or train, and it had a baby kangaroo in it... and it may have been a boxing kangaroo.

    Silly Aussies... they're roos not mice!

  • Uhmm....Giga-mice are cool....I want one as a pet, do they come in white?

    Warning: paranoia-rant follows, but somebody has to.....

    Another implication is, that once the scientists gain sufficient control over the building-blocks of mice etc., it is only a matter of time before they do so over humans such as what the article says about "new treatments" for different diseases. Now, what exactly is a disease? being left-handed? being gay? being {communist|republican|democrat|facist|capitalist}? being anything but what Hitler thought of as the perfect human?

    Interresting enough, with detailed control like that, when will it be possible to bread humans who do not only look alike but who (biologically determined) will think alike too??? (this, of course, under the assumption that such is mainly biologically determined rather than socially).

    While I think that such research and results is most interresting, I am also a bit vary of the concequences - as I said: paranoia-rant...

  • ... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    All I wanna know is, will it work on certain body parts while leaving the rest of me as it is?
  • Anyone checked if you can do the same to cats to?
    Might come in handy when those mouses get too big....
  • I thought elephants were grey already...

  • Mouse Eugenics (Score:5)

    by Skald ( 140034 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2000 @11:04PM (#957313)
    So what's the story behind all this stuff? Scientists have produced mice that are 30-40% larger than normal, mice which live 3 times as long as normal mice, and, of course, the brilliant Doogie Mice.

    We seem to be laying the groundwork for a master race of mice... but why? Maybe there's more to Hitchhiker's than we thought...

  • What, is somebody inhaling all the references for offline browsing or something??

  • Pretty soon all the whacked-out parents are going to try to genetically engineer their child.

    I feel a reference to the movie Gattaca [imdb.com] is appropriate - they describe exactly that scenario and (possible) concequences hereof. Go watch it, it is actually quite good.

  • If we can get one with increased intelligence, size, and longevity, it'll probably demand a retirement plan.

  • Fun ? (Score:1)

    by grff ( 21061 )
    Why is this Fun Research. There has been a major problem with rabbits overrunning Australia, when this non native species was introduced into the country from europe. What is going to happen when (not if) these Giant mice escape.

  • Does it work on animals after birth? (Score:3)

    by BrianW ( 180468 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2000 @11:10PM (#957318)
    From what I understand, you can't make genetic alterations to animals, people, etc once they're developed (those mice were born with the altered genes), ruling out the possibility of tampering with people who want to change some genetic aspect of themselves. However, there's always talk of using genetic modifications because someone decides that they'd like to be taller, or have green eyes, or something.

    Is this right, or am I holding the end of the stick that has "this is the wrong end" written on it?
  • Its a Kangaroo
  • Genetic "engineering" is not a bit of fun, it is the greatest threat to humanity we have ever faced
    If you change that to "humanity as we know it today", I would say that you are just about right.

    We need to change end evolve - speeding up the process will probably make us stumble a couple of times, but ...well, you cant splice a gene with out cracking a few hardheads. Or something.
    --

  • IIRC, which I may not - it's been a while since I was taught this stuff - it's possible to change some of the genetic make-up (hence gene-therapy), though tampering with such things can lead to cell mutation. Or cancer, as we like to call it.
  • People, this is no real accomplishment becuase, believe it or not, mice which are 30-40% bigger have been around since the beginning of history. They're called rats, okay?

    [Insert the obligatory one liner about now having to breed lager cats here.]

  • dont wear any socks, and then see if you get bigger... if you dont get it, RTFA (read the f'n article)

    {shhhhh... the froggies are asleep.}
    spam-proofing?
  • Now, what exactly is a disease? being left-handed? being gay? being {communist|republican|democrat|facist|capitalist}?

    Being ein sheissekopf. A policy of Moderation has failed us... zis offers ze Final Solution to ze Troll Problem. A greater Slashdot is at hand...

  • The elephants were painted an orangish-brown in the cartoon.

    --

  • Nonsense, thinking that we are somehow able to improve upon the Divine plan of God is hubris of the highest order. God's plan has given us the wonderful variety of life that we see today, not some "scientist" more interested than having his name on a paper than the ethical and moral implications of their work.

    There is, quite simply, no good reason for genetic engineering, and many bad ones. We have reached the point where science is moving too fast for ethical considerations to be applied, and the amoral leanings that the genetics community has displayed so far does not given me confidence that the right thing will be done.

    We need to stop all of this research now and appoint an ethics committe comprised of both the finest scientific and religious minds to determine what should be allowed to be done. Hopefully, common sense and Christian decency will prevail over the "research now and worry about it later" attitude displayed by scientists.



    ---
    Jon E. Erikson
  • This seems very similar to CPU overclocking. Change one "regulator" setting (in fact, in the "BIOS"), and presto - overclocked mice!

    But do they need little cooling fans in their cages? (perhaps because their surface heat dissipation system is no longer enough to handle their heat generation?).

    Has anyone run CPU (i.e. brain) diagnostics on them?

  • What's the name of that movie with the giant mice again? It was on Neo's TV in the Matrix...

    The movie on Neo's TV was Night of the Lepus, and they were giant rabbits. More of the White Rabbit theme.

  • You see, I know you're a troll, but I still bite! Because you're just so good at spouting easy-to-refute, offensive ideas.#

    You say "There is, quite simply, no good reason for genetic engineering". What about colour-blindness, short-sightedness, hereditary heart and neurological diseases? Sickle-cell anaemia? These are all diseases with genetic causes that genetic engineering could wipe out, bringing us closer to the "image of God" that I'm pretty sure you're interested in.

    But that's not where it ends. I don't believe in God, I think evolution makes more sense, and so why not give it a boost? I want better eyesight, more efficient lungs, stronger muscles, a healthier heart, a longer life! Genetic engineering can give me those things, and they can't come fast enough. 200 years from now, people celebrating their 150th birthday will wonder how anybody could have been content to live only 80 or 90 years, how they could have got anything done in such a short time when life doesn't even get interesting until you're 170!

    And there's not even a reason to stop at genetic engineering... give me cybernetic engineering! I want a mind-machine link to the Internet and a body that can jet around just as easily in space as it can in atmosphere... how can you resist these massively cool benefits?

  • Scientific research is an order from God !
     It may surprize you to learn that the same technology that led to the nuclear bomb was also vital to the developement of the computer.
    You think this is new ?
    E-mail is to the postal system what genetic engineering is to inbreeding !
    Quoting the Bible "There is nothing new in the world"
    Yes perhaps inbreeding was about the dumbest of all human customs, but frankly there were some pretty good reasons stated for it. Hopefully with GE we will be able to gain it's good side without it's bad side, in other words, find a pre-birth vaxine for cancer or even aids. If somebody uses it to make and clone giant soldiers, that is a crime on his side, not on the conscience of the people who developed the tech behind it.
    If someone used a Playstation 2 to build a warhead guidance system (that possibility got slashdotted) would you blame sony ?

  • Of course, you are assuming that there is a God to begin with; or that your particular God has the same Divine Plan as a genetic researcher's God.

    I think an ethics committe is a good idea, but keep the "religious minds" out of the whole deal becuase, quite frankly, I have a really hard time with people telling me I can or can't do something just because God says so. I can't put myself ethically under the thumb of a being(s) I can't see or hear and who only talks to certain people. If I were one of these scientists, I'd listen more closely to the person who says, "Hey we really shouldn't be breeding these super mice becuase quite frankly my cat is scared witless," rather than the person who says, "Super mice are a sin against God's Divine plan." (Whatever the hell that plan might be...)

    Besides, I've always wanted blue eyes... And a bushy tail... yeah... then the chicks would dig me...

  • Why would anyone want to have been born 8000BC ??

  • Re:We need to stop this "bit of fun" now (Score:5)

    by voop ( 33465 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2000 @11:49PM (#957333)

    Nonsense, thinking that we are somehow able to improve upon the Divine plan of God is hubris of the highest order. God's plan has given us the wonderful variety of life that we see today, not some "scientist" more interested than having his name on a paper than the ethical and moral implications of their work.

    I know I am entering the really deep water here - peoples belifs are to be taken seriously - but I beg to offer a slightly different opinion on this. Not a flame - just a slightly different opinion...

    First, one could argue that genetic engineering might be part of this "God's" plan in the first place. After all, "God" being a (the) supreme being, then everything must be in accordance with this beings schedule, no? Including the scientists work on genetic engineering?

    Secondly, I am much more afraid of what people on this planet might go about doing with such a technology, than I am of what "God" might do. As other posters have pointed out, there are plenty of madmen out there, who would make super-{soldiers|workers|scientists|whatever} (no need to mention a trivial thing such as "super-sports-stars", which has been tried for years through doping etc). Ok, in accordance with my first point, actions of such madmen may just be the "punishment of God" for tampering with the genes. However I do have a hard time believing that a supreme being would include in his plan " 1) make mankind do something clever, 2) punish mankind for 1)".

    Thirdly, I believe that there is more to it than that scientists are only aiming for "getting their name on a paper". Being in science myself, I know that publication is a major goal for any scientist (the only measure you are evaluated against is your publication rate, usually). I also agree, that during the process of researching, very little concirn is usually given to the ethical implications of the research. To me, personally, and probably to a lot of others, this is because...well, I am not personally qualified to evaluate such. Blinded by the "coolness" of some discovery and all the wonderfull things this discovery will do, I doubt that a scientist is much capable of taking two steps backwards and saying "hey, this may be bad, I better not publish". After all, scientists are only humans (maybe we should investigate genetically engineering better and more ethical scientists to prevent ideas such as "genetic engineering" from emerging?).

    Fourthly, I believe that for some scientist to decide against publishing a discovery of some sort or should decide against researching some area based on "ethics" is just as harmfull - and unethical. Preventing the world from learning secrets of life might also be preventing the world from becomming a better place to live.

    That is, not saying that all new discoveries are good. They are not. But they should not be dismissed solely on the basis of being "new" and potentially applicable for "unethical" purposes. Everything can be applied in both a good and a bad way...

  • Yikes, I was quickly mouse-scrolling and I though that said giant spiders. [shudder]

    Of course, giant spider bodyguards would be a tad bit more imposing than a giant human bodyguards...

  • Imagine these giant mice in your kitchen...

    Nah. OK, so they've got them of a size that means you don't need about fifteen just to make a decent hors d'oeuvre, but they're not going to taste any different.

    Friend rodent, alas, invariably tastes too gamey for me, even if he's farm-reared. Although barbecued rabbit has its moments, and with enough tandoori paste you can eat anything.

  • Agreed. Regardless of whether it is offensive to Christians.
  • Is this the actual product or just a rendition? Do they work on your trousers? How about a glass table top? What if your girlfriend shines a laser pointer at it? How well do they function on the side of exploding volcanoes? How come they have no buttons? Or are those shiny bits buttons? What do they do if you squeeze them? I think I'll stick with my plain old Kensington Mouse for now... What's that? Wrong thread you say?
  • mmmm....Food of the Gods...
  • There is, quite simply, no good reason for genetic engineering, and many bad ones.

    Maybe one day scientists will find out why we are so F*CKING evil to each other. Did god ever solve that one? He is the one who gave us these feelings and motivations, right?

    Oh I forgot it wasn't him it was that angel that got away from him that one time. Lucifer? The one he created. The one that he can't control anymore. He is the one that makes us do things, or is it free will? When there are people like Ted Bundy killing people who is responsible? God made Bundy they way he is right? Does god kill people or do murders kill people? What about war? Is it OK for me to kill people in war or is that a sin?

    Whoa! That was 10 years of catholic school comming out!
    Anyway, I know what this will lead to. Bodybuilders the size of trucks, and if you thought woman went too far with breast implants... wait till you see what the guys do with this!
  • obligatory one liner about now having to breed lager cats

    Lager cats?? Sounds like that beer spam is working on everyone's subcon!

  • Now, il only Apple could use this modified gene to bring us decent-sized hockey-pux.....
  • it's not fun
    it's not good
    it makes me very sad
    leave it alone
    it's real use is to make bigger so called food animals which is a despicable activity already.

    If animals are so good for testing on because the resemble the human body so much then how come you can say they are not in any way concious or appreciate their environment. Put yourself in the hooves of a bovine for two minutes as your offspring are taken away and you never see them again. Every year. For the duration of your life.

    Put your eyes inside a pigs head as it gets pushed down the ramp of the lorry on it's way to slaughter. It can smell, it can feel the impending doom in the air.

    Animals are not autonoma.

    You are an animal not something separate and special.

    Use the conciousness you have to see with.

    Wake up!!
    .oO0Oo.

  • Here in New Zealand the general attitude is very paranoid (or cautious, depending on who you are) towards genetic engineering, and at least on paper it's quite heavily regulated.

    Anyway, there was recently a government probe [stuff.co.nz] that found that a full 18% of the genetic engineering experiments were completely unauthorised. (Followup scientist reaction here [stuff.co.nz].) I'm inclined to go with the scientists, if for no other reason because from where I am the whole public attitude seems more like an ignorant vigilante mob.

    Does anyone have any ideas on how this could or should be regulated (if at all) if for no other reason, to prevent potentially dangerous results accidently (or deliberately) seeping into the environment?


    ===

  • I say their gearing up for war.... (Score:5)

    by yek401 ( 14692 ) on Wednesday July 05, 2000 @12:28AM (#957344)
    Lets look at the facts folks:

    We've made them bigger [abc.net.au].
    We've made them smarter [yahoo.com].
    We've made them glow [about.com].
    We've cured their diabetes [about.com].
    We've even armed them with ears on their back [epicrecords.com]!

    Am I saying the world is going to be taken over by hyperintelligent glowing super mice that shoot insulin from the ears on their backs?

    Of course not!

    I'm saying the pan-galactic beings from another dimension who run this planet are getting ready for war, and they are using the Earth as a training facility.


    (If you haven't read the hitchhickers guide to the galaxy let me first say don't panic! Secondly, go read it.)

  • Maybe one day scientists will find out why we are so F*CKING evil to each other. Did god ever solve that one? He is the one who gave us these feelings and motivations, right?

    We are evil because of Satan's influence in the world turning people away from the love of the Lord through such popular modern myths as the Big Bang theory, "evolution" (as if sheer chance could result in human beings!) and atheism. God gave us free will because that way our love for him will mean something rather than being blind obedience.

    Does god kill people or do murders kill people? What about war? Is it OK for me to kill people in war or is that a sin?

    Murder is only ethical when it is done in the name of the Lord, to protect His followers or to punish those who oppose his Truth. Sin cannot accrue to one who acts according to the Lord's wishes.

    Whoa! That was 10 years of catholic school comming out!

    But Catholics are not Christians and are destined for Hell when they die. Their worship of idols such as the "virgin" Mary and their "saints" precludes them from being Christians. Their so-called "religion" is a foul mockery of Christianity.



    ---
    Jon E. Erikson

  • ROUS's (Score:1)

    by flink ( 18449 )
    What about the ROUS's?

    Rodents of Unusual Size? I don't believe they exist!
  • Personally, I hate living in this era. Wish I could have been born 10,000 years from now...

    And now! Thanks to the miracles of modern cloning... you can be!

  • Re:We need to stop this "bit of fun" now (Score:5)

    by Manaz ( 46799 ) on Wednesday July 05, 2000 @12:41AM (#957348) Homepage
    Giant mice? What's next, giant women?

    Yep - women are the logical next step from mice. No, really, they are.

    The scientists who spend their time butchering innocent mice would be better off, both scientifically and ethically, spending their time doing something which is a) of benefit to people and not mice and b) less offensive to decent Christians.

    Butchering - I think you'll find that genetic manipulation is a LITTLE more refined than "butchering". Have you stoppped to think of the possible benefits we might gain from this research? Perhaps making people resistant to AIDS? Or perhaps cancer (since bigotted religeous zealots like you would naturally assume that AIDS is a disease of people of low moral quality)? Or polio, SIDS, or in fact any of the multitude of diseases and illnesses which currently afflict the innocent?

    And this sentance - "Scientists in Australia have done some fun things with genetics ..." - am I the only person who thinks that this flappant attitude is appalling?

    That'd be "sentence" and "flippant" unless I'm mistaken, but we'll leave the semantics of correct spelling, grammar and punctuation out of this, shall we? Have you perchance thought that some people actually find scientific discovery interesting, and perchance fun? Just because you've got a stick up your ass doesn't meant the rest of us do.

    Tinkering with the natural order of things which God has decreed is not a "bit of fun", it is both dangerous and amoral and needs to be stopped.

    Granted, there are potentially "bad" uses for this technology (at least when it matures). But we've had nuclear weapons since the end of the 2nd world war, they're proven to be VERY destructive, and yet we've managed to (albeit only just at times) avoid blowing the living shit out of the planet with them. Give human kind SOME credit, please. You'd be surprised just how moral we can be as a race when necessary.

    Did you know that the majority of our technological advancements (even the good ones, that save lives) have come about due to war? A point to ponder....

    Unfortunately thanks to the liberal fundamentalists who hold power over much of the Western world, these people are given free license to blaspheme and tamper with something which could kill us all even worse than the plagues God sent to punish the Egyptians.

    Ah, a fire and brimstone Christian - now I'm starting to understand. Have you perchance read this wonderful part of the Bible called the "New Testament"? Incidently, I suggest that you look up the meaning of the political buzzwords you're using - because Liberal Fundamentalists are generally the very people opposing the sort of research and development of scientific knowledge that you youreself are complaining about.

    Genetic "engineering" is not a bit of fun, it is the greatest threat to humanity we have ever faced.

    And you have scientific proof to back up this statement? Oh, silly me - of course you don't - science is the art of witches isn't it! You wouldn't want to make a well backed up point and end up being burned at the stake now, would you?

    Today it may be fat mice, but who knows what horrors tomorrow may bring?

    Bigger cattle, which feed more people? Better crop averages, so that we might feed the starving? The health benefits I mentioned before? Sure, there COULD be bad things that come of this technology, but other great scientific discoveries, like electricity, can also be used for the powers of darkness. Quick, shut down your PC - it uses the Devil's own power!
  • Remember:

    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you!

  • Giant mice ? (Score:3)

    by Sìgnal ll ( 203092 ) on Wednesday July 05, 2000 @12:42AM (#957350)
    i would prefer giant worms, producing more spice.

    the sleeper must awake.
  • Two industries I can think of that might be sponsoring this research:

    - Basketball teams.
    - Porn flick producers.

    "Where bigger can only mean better!" hehehehehe
  • % of replies in this subthread written by "The Anti-Troll" -- 15%.

    Looks like a biter to me.

    "No matter what you say, if you reply to a troll, you are a mark. Even if you say 'I'm sure this is a troll, but ....'. Even if you say 'Please don't reply to this troll'. If you bite, you fscking bite, and you can't pretend you didn't. No, you don't look ironic and cool. YHL."
    --from the Slashdot Troll Faq [slashdot.org]

    Fifteen per cent. You're a gold mine, you are, mate. But the difference is that JE is contributing original content, and you're spamming.

    Oh yeh, and talking about "The Inch Fan" isn't making you look 31337. the link is ?sid=k23220inchfan [olsentwins.com], for anyone who gives a fuck. And it's a v. v. old sid, now only used for OSM conspiracy theories.

    --da lawyer is in da house.

  • > Can you just imagine if your mother found one of these in your kitchen?

    It shouldn't actually matter all that much, as they're still significantly smaller than the average rat, which I know from personal experience can have quite a surprising effect on normally sane people.

  • Can they do this with human bodily appendages? Where do I sign up? - RKeefe http://www.silverphoenix2.com/ [silverphoenix2.com]
  • Larger cats? We got them as well.... they're called "lions"...
  • A more immediate scenario would be body-builders injecting an inhibitor to this protein or a virus programmed to knock out the gene into their muscle tissue. This is not really any stranger than what is already going on in the sporting world at the moment anyway, so I shouldn't think one more treatment of this kind would make all that much difference.

  • I fully agree.

    In fact, I posted a similar point to the "ask slashdot" topic a week or two ago. But it was rejected, so I never did find out what anyone thought of it (except that at least one admin didn't agree with me).

    The number of off-topic, obscene, pointless, flaming, or just plain trolling posts on Slashdot has increased recently to the point where they can overwhelm an article.

    The "first post" syndrome is also worth mentioning here.

    In moderation (excuse the pun), these things are all good fun; done to excess, as they seem to be these days, they just ruin the whole thing.

    Thank you datadictator for bringing this up. :-)
  • So that is where they get the Giant Rats for Everquest [sony.com]....
  • It's an interesting point to note that the world's tallest man (as listed in the Guinness book of Records) was known to have a 'disease' (we'd call it a genetic mutation these days) which had a similar effect: nothing told his body to stop growing, and he was still growing at the time of his death (at a fairly young age; cause unrelated to his height).
  • That these benefits will only be available to a privileged minority. We will doubtless in (most of) our lifetimes see this start to come about, so that wealthy first world citizens gain superhuman ability in many fields while the poorer people are stuck with the genes they started with and therefore have an even tougher time playing catch-up than they did before. At least one person has already mentioned 'Gattaca' today, but it should be pointed out that when people with ordinary genes can no longer get the better jobs because their parents couldn't afford to have them altered, the world is going to start to be a very dark place. I believe in a free market, but I also would like to see equal opportunities from birth to a greater, not to a lesser, degree than we see today. Sadly, I just don't think that it's going to happen.
  • A group of Japanese scientists today claimed success in their attempts to grow larger lizards, moths and three-headed dragons.
    Inhabitants of Tokyo, Osaka and Kyoto are being advised to evacuate their homes immediately.
  • There feature is open to you, and it's a hell of a lot easier to moderate most of the good ones up than most of the bad ones down.

    With only view 2+ you don't see any crap, and if you're really interested in the article just set tolerance back to 1 so you get the good stuff.
  • God gave us free will because that way our love for him will mean something rather than being blind obedience.

    What will it mean?

    Free will? Blind obedience? What difference does it make to god?

  • Are they overclocked ? Or do they have four buttons instead of three ?

    I think we should be told.
  • No reason why not, as it's probably much easier than producing a tame lynx. Also, most domestic cats will shy away from attacking a rat as it's just not worth it. Still, 'tameness' itself is an issue here. Domestic cats today often have a tendency to scratch and bite people, and those that do are also often the best hunters. They also kill desirable species, like wild birds and turn feral from time to time. Do we want to encourage a larger, hungrier predator?

  • I bet you feel absolutely no pain at the murder of plants you eat every day. And as a microbiologist, I have to remind you of the millions of bacteria that must die for your yogurt, and likewise the millions of yeast cells that must die for your beer, wine, and bread.

    You might claim that well, plants and microbes are lower organisms and thus don't count. But all these organisms respond to stimuli, and so at some very basic level can "think" and "feel". They simply are less cute than mammals because they aren't furry, and so don't have an army of fuzzy-minded defenders. Get back to me when you can tell me how heterotrophic organisms like humans can live in any other way than by killing other life forms. Meanwhile, being consigned to living off death, I'll choose the most tasty dead things for my meals. Not to mention live, but soon to be dead in my stomach things, like draft beer.
  • Build a bigger mouse trap... (that you can check mail and surf the web on!) Sweeet
    Nuff Respec'

    DeICQLady
    7D3 CPE
  • Better crop averages, so that we might feed the starving?

    If bigger grain surpluses could feed the starving, the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union would have done so long ago. It's already been proved to most people's satisfaction that famines are an economic disaster, not an ecological one.

  • Re:Whats this - nuthin to do with Linux or compute (Score:4)

    by Skald ( 140034 ) on Wednesday July 05, 2000 @01:25AM (#957369)
    Can we keep things IT related in the future.

    Uh... no. This is not a Linux news site... not even a computer news site. And if you want your suggestions taken seriously, log in.

  • Ah, but you have made a crucial mistake.

    You're assuming I give a fuck. Quoting from your own quote:

    Oh dear, seems you managed to make yourself look silly by biting. And this is ironic, because you're biting to tell me i'm a biter.
    Well, you appear to have made a fool of yourself. I declare victory.

    --montoya, it rhymes wit' lawya

    oh yeh, btw, I used "irony" correctly, you used it wrongly.

  • Are we on the verge of being wiped out by the dreaded Tyrano-hamsterous Rex?

  • Have you stoppped to think of the possible benefits we might gain from this research? Perhaps making people resistant to AIDS? Or perhaps cancer (since bigotted religeous zealots like you would naturally assume that AIDS is a disease of people of low moral quality)?

    AIDS is not there no punish those of low moral quality, it is there to punish us all for allowing these people to become part of normal society rather than being reviled for their unGodly perversions. If it were as you say then decent people wouldn't catch it would they?

    That'd be "sentence" and "flippant" unless I'm mistaken, but we'll leave the semantics of correct spelling, grammar and punctuation out of this, shall we?

    Ooh, a grammer flame, how mature. That obviously lends credence to your arguments.

    Have you perchance thought that some people actually find scientific discovery interesting, and perchance fun? Just because you've got a stick up your ass doesn't meant the rest of us do.

    Yes, your definition of "fun" is a true product of the secular brainwashing you have received thanks to the liberal "educators" that have an agenda to destroy any trace of Christian ethics from children's education. And the fact that it is obviously working only means we will have to fight harder to turn people back to the love of our Lord.

    Give human kind SOME credit, please. You'd be surprised just how moral we can be as a race when necessary.

    Because up until recently decent Christian ethics were viewed as important, and people heeded the word of God. In today's climate of militant atheism ethics and morals come in second place to scientific "advancement".

    Sure, there COULD be bad things that come of this technology, but other great scientific discoveries, like electricity, can also be used for the powers of darkness. Quick, shut down your PC - it uses the Devil's own power!

    I think you are mistaking me for some kind of Luddite, which I am obviously not. I am merely concerned about the dangers which genetics poses, and how Christianity has been slandered and then abanonded by a society that is walking straight into Satan's grasp with open arms. Any right-thinking person should agree with what I'm saying.



    ---
    Jon E. Erikson

  • Re:"Overclocked" mice - do they work as well? (Score:5)

    by Alik ( 81811 ) on Wednesday July 05, 2000 @01:33AM (#957374)
    Actually, relative heat loss is determined by an animal's surface area/volume ratio, and larger animals have lower SA/V. An elephant retains body heat much better than a mouse, and the mouse compensates for this by having a metabolism from hell.

    So, in theory, if one grew a mouse the size of a dog and left its metabolic rate alone, yes, it actually might have troubles with overheating.

    That's pretty cool.
  • There is no reason you couldn't design a virus to do exactly that --- after all, that is what they do naturally, only the genes they insert tend to cause the virus to replicate and kill the host cell. This need not be the case.

  • Voided warranty (Score:3)

    by FascDot Killed My Pr ( 24021 ) on Wednesday July 05, 2000 @02:01AM (#957377)
    Lets not get too excited about this. The researchers are doing an EXPERIMENT. Obviously the first part was "can we make mice big by removing this gene?" But the second part is just as important "what else breaks when we remove this gene?"

    Given the function (growth inhibition) of the gene in question, I'm going to bet these mice are especially susceptible to cancer.
    --
  • The researchers say the work "may lead to developing new medicines for the treatment of growth and muscle-wasting disorders."

    As well as exciting new cancers when cells grow out of control without those inhibitors... :-)

    --
  • Just a reminder. For every scientific advancement that brings us closer to a (1984|Brave New World|Logan's Run|etc) future, there will always be a few of us freaks who will refuse to do as we're told. We'll escape, find weapons, learn to pilot harrier jets (or something similar) and come back and free everyone.

    We owe it to the world to make sure that if `unlikely horrible technology driven society' comes to pass, that `unlikely rebel hero saviors' will exist. Am I right or am I right?

    Bad Mojo [rps.net]
  • [Disclaimer: I am not religious]

    After all, "God" being a (the) supreme being, then everything must be in accordance with this beings schedule, no? Including the scientists work on genetic engineering?

    That's an argument I've used in the past, but it does have one fatal flaw - the concept of free will.

    We have been granted free will to behave as we see fit - and that includes doing things that "God" would not approve of.

    I know it's a work of fiction, but Paradise Lost [uoregon.edu] discusses the concept, and "God's" reasons for giving us our free will. (And is a good read in itself, IMHO)

    Cheers,

    Tim
  • The largest naturally-occuring rodents, Amber Rhyser, which lived in Anguila, were larger than a modern Grizzly Bear. Their teeth alone were larger than typical hamsters or mice.

    If these scientists could bring Amber Rhyser back from extinction, or modify rodent DNA to produce a modern version, THAT would be impressive. And would create a whole new chair-manufacturing industry for sitcoms.

  • "And this sentance - "Scientists in Australia have done some fun things with genetics ..." - am I the only person who thinks that this flappant attitude is appalling? Tinkering with the natural order of things which God has decreed is not a "bit of fun", it is both dangerous and amoral and needs to be stopped."

    Wait a moment... feel free to flame Timothy, who submitted the story, but besides him, who's talking about fun here? If you'll take a look at the original Nature article, the scientists who published the article have a serious, sober attitude towards their own work.
  • Well well, look at that hamster, he's as big as a blimp,
    And there's one the size of Central Park.
    They're usin' telephone poles to pick their teeth.
    They're evil and nasty, and they glow in the dark.

    Well don't waste any more of your bullets, boys.
    You know it just makes 'em mad when you shoot.
    They're gonna stomp us into jelly, and conquer the world.
    But you gotta admit, they're really - kinda cute now.

    Attack of the Radioactive Hamsters from a planet near Mars.
    A race from a distant place, they came in UFO's shaped just like Cuban cigars.
    Man, oh man, you oughta hear 'em squeal.
    Now the whole wide world is their exercise wheel.
    Attack of the Radioactive Hamsters from a planet near Mars.

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?

  • For certain areas of the body, yes, you can change small areas of the genome. For instance, in Cystic Fibrosis (CF), the most effective therapy to this point has been to introduce plasmid vectors of a sort to the throat of an affected individual - the genes of the vectors introduce themselves to the human's genes and they have a little party and switch things up. Because every cell in your body has the same genome, it's impossible to change every cell in your body (your cells change over every 24 hours) with current technology.

    The closest thing we have to creating alpha's (Brave New World) is to do genetic screening in the womb early on, and THEN alter the genetic makeup while there are still a managable amount of cells.

    Cancer is not simply mutation - a cancer starts off as a cell that does not know when to stop reproducing because it has no growth inhibitors in its genome. So it just keeps on producing more and more cancerous cells. It's not that these cells actually carry any disease - it's that they get in the way of normal bodily functions that's the problem.

  • Don't people see where all this is leading! For christ's sake! Sure, first it's the criminal mice and sterilization experiments. Then it's the diseased and insane mice. Then it's mice who have "unfavorable" political views. Then the old or retarded mice. Soon every mouse which does not fit the ideal are told they are being evacuated, put on cattle cars, lined up at the camp, told they'll see the rest of their family after "clean up" (Oh sure!). Father mice will have to make up a story to their kids that this is all a game and in the end they will win a tank! Oh boy!

    Haven't we learned ANYTHING from history? If you do nothing when they come for everybody else, who will help you when they come for you? PLEASE, stop the madness!
  • Next it'll be rats, spiders, snakes, ants and women. Then we'll all be living in a real live B movie. Actually, come to think of it, giant mutant women might be quite interesting.

  • Sure, there COULD be bad things that come of this technology, but other great scientific discoveries, like electricity, can also be used for the powers of darkness. Quick, shut down your PC - it uses the Devil's own power!

    Don't grin too quickly -- Edison was dead set against AC current, as he couldn't handle the math, and he was heavily invested in DC technology. His "AC Kills" campaign electrocuted a number of horses and dogs... Even smart people can be threatened by new technology.

  • What's next, giant women?

    now there's a scientists dream - forget those messy troublesome si or whatnot implants.
  • The body works by balancing everything. Out bodies are constantly releasing and absorbing. When our blood sugar gets low we release one chemical, when its high we release another. Although many times we're lopsided and only using one chemical/hormone. But the balance is there to protect us from most circumstances, its our backup system, that stops us from getting into an infinite loop. Cancer is caused by cells loosing their ability to stop growing.

    It's dangerous knowing that sciencetists removing a restricting gene is progress. In my mind its an ignorant move to make a headline. This breakthough is closer to cancer than anything else.

    Scientists should be looking for ways to better control the balance, not pushing it until it breaks (were we don't learn anything)
  • until they attack Tokyo, knock down a few buildings and have a face off with Godzilla ...
  • It occurs to me that what has been done here is to remove, in infancy, the manufacture of a growth regulator. However, for corrective purposes I fail to see how this helps that much.

    We need to ask ourselves whether growth problems are due to over production of growth inhibitor or underproduction of stimulant.

    If I carry a genetic predisposition to produce less growth hormone than normal, is the answer to increase that production or reduce my ability to control my growth processes by paring down my inhibitor production to redress the imbalance?

    My veiw on this is that the best way to solve the problem is liberal application of Ochams shaving device. How often have you trashed your installation because you wanted to upgrade too many components in one go? Right. Now pretend it's your unborn baby/ newborn child that needs "upgrading".

    The ability to remove an inhibitor does not, in my opinion, provide the correct fix.

    Chris.
  • They're not giant mice, they're actually kangaroos, damn it. You think people would suspect, these news coming from Australia.
    Don't you people pay attention to Daffy Duck cartoons anymore?

  • You have no idea. The rodent invasion has already begun [nypostonline.com]!

    Let me just take a moment to welcome our new rodent overlords. I think that as a commentator on Smartline, the best pundit show in Springfield, that I will be quite useful to our new masters. You will need someone with knowledge of your human subjects in your terrible new regime.

  • This is a very good idea. We need only to do the following:
    • Apply this technique to turtles
    • Teach them martial arts
    Then, and only then, can we rid ourselves of the evil Shredder and his minions!

    Turtle power!
  • God's plan, my ass. You don't need some damned religious argument to say that direct genetic manipulation is dangerous/bad/etc.

    Mankind has been diddling genetics since we came out of the trees and started planting gardens. Selective breeding has been a rule of plant/animal husbandry (why not wifery?) forever and a day.

    The difference is that our previous genetic meddlings have involved selecting traits and cross-breeding. Everything stayed within the pyhlum, if not always the species (depending on your definition of species; substitute family, I suppose).

    Now, however, we're directly buggering with genes. Minced genes are being fired into cells to create mutations, with *no* idea of what those mutations might result in. This is controlled selective cross-breeding: it's mad scientist chaos.

    And we're mixing phylum. You might thrust your woody through the knothole in the fence, but it wasn't gonna give you progeny...

    ...but now human metalothienen, a gene that is expressed in quantity in breast and testicular cancer, is being combined with plant genes. The offspring is good at sucking up toxic metals -- but no one in a position of responsibility seems to consider it a poor idea to put human cancer genes into a crop that will express those genes in its pollen, which we'll end up breathing.

    ...a Brazilian nut gene was spliced into soybeans, to produce a "better" soybean. Unfortunately, said product tended to kill people with nut allergies. And soybean is used in some 80% of processed foods.

    ...and then we have Monsanto, which has genetically engineered its seeds to be sterile in the second generation. All well and good, until the damned things cross-pollinate with the crops of those farmers who put aside seed to replant next year. We'll all be up shit creek when a third of our crops fail.

    The long and the short of it is that selective breeding programs never put anyone at risk: the offspring weren't going to be dangerous mutant creatures that would savage the existing good populations, cause illness in humans or render our food supplies sterile.

    We've got very smart people doing very amazing things with genetics, but refusing their moral responsibility of ensuring public safety.

    It's a bloody shame, and I think that within the next twenty years, we'll be living in fear of the results. It's the nuclear scare all over again, played out with biology.

    --
  • I've been looking for this link all day : Mouse with Built in heatsink [geocities.com]. This is weird !!!!
  • why dont we using this technology to create giant cows, potatoes, etc?

    because its a BAD idea.
    do you seriously think the growth inhibitor is there for no reason? think thats all it does, inhibit growth?
    A while ago, they almost started spreading a gentically engineered plant that would help take impurities out of the soil, help clean up the environment, etc. good intentions.

    this plant also turned out to put something back, which would be the botanical equivelant of cancer.

    so, no, this would not be cool.
  • It is possable to alter genes at any time. Doing it on a single cell is much easier than on many millions of cells, so pre-natal genetic modification is preffered, from that point of view.

    However, there are other aspects too. If you take a fully grown man, and change his genes so that he would grow to 8 foot tall, his height isjust not goin to change. This is because he has already passed the stage where such gene would be used. It's the same for eye colour - your eye are already grown, so they won't chage, even if you change the genes.

    However, altering a 5 year old childs gene to make him grow to 8 foot tall would have an effect (although possibly not the _full_ effect), as he has most of his growing still to do. This assumes that you can get the genes to the appropriate cells suitable.

    This is a slightly hand-wavy explanation, but I believe it gets the point across.

    In summary, gene therepay can only change how you grow, not how you have grown.

    For example, in Cystic Fibrosis, the lungs produce mucus that is too sticky. Gene therapy can help, as it can tell the lungs to make mucus with the correct level of stickyness. After a shot time, the mucus in the lungs will be replaced with the corrected mucus, fixing that problem.

    With Downs syndrome, however, the brain develops abnormally. Correcting the genetic fault will not fix the symtoms, because the brain is fully grown, and thus not fixable in this way (other solutions, howwever, are possable).
  • This would totally lower my snake feeding bills.
  • how does the above comment shed any kind of actual insight on the above article?

    I can only suppose that this was in reference to pointing out the related mouse developments (and I forgot to mention, as you pointed out, glowing green mice). Sure, "insightful" is a little odd... but don't rain on my parade! ;-)

  • > (I mean come on, RABBITS, couldn't you just poison the carrots or something?)

    Consult the Book of Armament, Chapter 5 versus 1 to 13

    "And the lord did Sayeth..""

    yeah, yeah, get on with it...

    Take thy holy Hand-granade and count to three. Not two, and not four, and five is definitely right out!

    Or something like that. I suggest you watch Monty Python's Holy Grail as to why you should be scared of cute furry bunnies.

  • God has not sent AIDS to destroy us, merely to guide us to the correct path.

    And you have the road map here I am assuming from your rants. I am a Christian, but I am no where near as arrogant as you. I really hope you do read this one.
    Repeat after me: NO HUMAN KNOWS THE WILL OR INTENT OF GOD. PERIOD. EVER.
    And you never will, so do not patronize scientists who may be in divine light with their genetic research. Perhaps that is God's plan and you are a tool of the devil. You never know because any human's futile little mind couldn't conceive of a fraction of God's plan.
    moral of my post: Don't speak for God.

    nerdfarm.org [nerdfarm.org]

Slashdot Top Deals

Tomorrow's computers some time next month. -- DEC

Close