Mutation Creates SuperKid 747
Tzarius writes "It's not exactly regular Slashdot fare, but the NYTimes has a story about a kid in Berlin (now 4 years old) who was born with naturally massive muscles. It's not a new condition, but it apparently hasn't been recorded in humans before. It also looks like the cause is a suppression of the myostatin protein, which could be reproducible." Reader Spazmasta adds "A gene that blocks production of a muscle-limiting protein (called myostatin) has been found in a abnormally muscular German baby. This news comes apparently 7 years after researchers at Johns Hopkins created 'mighty mice' through a related approach, turning off the gene that produces the muscle-limiting protein. I, for one, welcome our new myostatin-free overlords."
It's destiny (Score:5, Funny)
PHOTO HERE (Score:5, Informative)
Re:PHOTO HERE (Score:5, Funny)
Who's Your Daddy? (Score:5, Funny)
Barney and Betty's kid? How about a reality check. Consider the following from one of the articles:
They probably couldn't get ahold of the father because he was doing the laundry, taking out the trash or washing dishes, if he knows what's good for him!
Well that's new (?) (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, I had the same thought about the "miraculous virgin birth" [google.com] when I learned about parthenogenesis. [google.com]
Re:Well that's new (?) (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:PHOTO HERE (Score:5, Interesting)
It's particularly interesting that this [the German child's case] is the first time it's been recorded from infancy - that seems very odd!
Re:It's destiny (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's destiny (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's destiny (Score:4, Insightful)
And they were the rascists?...
Cute baby! (Score:5, Funny)
Cute maybe - but at 10 yrs old he'll turn green... (Score:5, Funny)
Looks like (Score:3, Funny)
where are the pics? (Score:5, Funny)
here's a picture of his asscrack! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:here's a picture of his asscrack! (Score:5, Funny)
For those of you who are afraid to follow the link, in the photo the kid has very well defined leg muscles for a 6 day old baby.
I myself make, uh, plenty of myostatin. In fact, that's my superpower -- making tons of myostatin to keep my body almost superhumanly unmuscled.
Re:here's a picture of his asscrack! (Score:5, Interesting)
And I thought I was the only one...
I've always wondered about that. My sister's kids are built like tanks... incredibly solid bodies, large and very strong. My kids however, are more normal, what you'd typically expect for kids (at least their bodies... they all have "interesting" personalities just like their parents
Her oldest child is now eight. He's a sweet boy, but he's had a fair amount of medical problems. He's the biggest and strongest in his class though, which can be good... or bad, and not suprisingly, he excels at athletics.
I have a feeling that the interest in this will be huge and some day there might be some skinny, sickly kid named Steve Rogers who gets and injection and goes on to fight America's enemies as some kind of super soldier.
Re:here's a picture of his asscrack! (Score:5, Funny)
They've got an incredibly understanding father if they inherited any genes from their "uncle" ;)
Re:here's a picture of his asscrack! (Score:4, Insightful)
It is an unfortunate photo (it's a pretty gross photo actually, surprised it was the only one they could get their hands on).
I'm curious. Why do you think it's a pretty gross photo? It's a baby's butt. That's about as "ungross" as you can get. Well... unless the kid is taking a dump. HE HE HE
When my daughter was a baby, her butt was the cutest thing... well... until odor starting hitching a ride with the payload. Damn solid foods.
Re:here's a picture of his asscrack! (Score:5, Funny)
Someone.. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Someone.. (Score:5, Funny)
I dont think Richard is a genetic anomaly though... IIRC his parents are just martial arts and bodybuilding nuts.
Re:Someone.. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Someone.. (Score:4, Interesting)
There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Informative)
Think of it as being obese, but with muscle instead of fat. Why would that be an advantage?
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:4, Insightful)
You are very wrong (Score:5, Informative)
There is a finite number of times each cell in your body can replicate itself. Excessive muscle growth WILL limit the maximum lifespan of a life form, and it limits the lifespan of humans as well.
This is part of how limiting caloric intake increases lifespan, it literally reduces the overall cellular growth of a lifeform.
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:3, Informative)
The boy is healthy now, but doctors worry he could eventually suffer heart or other health problems
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Interesting)
of course, they don't really know. He may live to be 90, still be able to lift 2-3 times his weight, and show no ill effects.
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:4, Insightful)
For myself no. I tone up pretty quickly when I work out but I would not like to get too bulky, it used to be a real pain getting pants to fit my waist and thighs properly when I was bigger.
That aside there are health and dietary implications. You heart has to work harder to supply blood, particularly under heavy exercise, you lose mobility, and endurance sports become a lot more difficult (not really a bad thing
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:4, Informative)
- Muscle actually helps circulation by pushing veinous blood back towards the heart. The reason big powerlifters and Olympic lifters have problems is all the fat they have in addition to the muscle. Do leg presses and squats with light to medium weight for a few months and then walk up five flights of stairs. You will be considerably less winded than you would have been before you built those leg muscles.
- Endurance sports that don't involve long term steady activity are actually easier for muscular people. This kid may have as tough a time jogging 10 miles as someone the same weight and much fatter, but in football he'll probably catch his breath much more quickly between plays than anyone less fit.
- Bodybuilders who haven't ruined their flexibility with constant short range motions, joint damage from improper use of explosive motion exercises, and tendon damage from dangerous anabolic supplements can be extremely flexible. John Grimek, one of the greatest bodybuilders of the 20th century, could stand with his legs straight and rest his forearms on the ground. Casey Viator could touch his elbows together behind his head.
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:3, Insightful)
Adults would have an easier time of this if their arms were the length of a 4 year old's. I don't mean to belittle his strength, but this is an odd way to measure it since the length of the arm plays as much of a role as the weight involved. I would be more interested in what he can bench press compared to a normal 4 year old.
Re:There must be a major downside... (Score:5, Informative)
You're thinking of the cube-square law: surface area increases according to the square of the length, but volume increases according to the cube of the length. As mass correlates with volume, thus the thin legs of insects suffice to carry their weight, but elephants need thick stumpy legs.
But this has a number of biological consequences: not only would miniature elephants be (proportionally) super-strong and giant insects unable to support their own weight, but cells in the greater volume of larger animals require food and oxygen.
In an organism with a small volume to surface area ratio, all the cells are close enough to the organism's periphery to obtain their food and oxygen more or less directly from the environment. In "large" organisms, the internal cells must be supplied by the organism itself, so lungs and circulatory systems are needed.
(Indeed, the lungs -- and the intestines -- are designed to pack a lot of surface area, surfaces at which gases can be exchanged or nutrients absorbed, into a small volume, by means of foldings and branchings.)
In "medium-sized" (but still microscopic) organisms, primitive "lungs" -- as simple as a large hollow internal area lined with cells -- and "circulatory systems" -- such as an undifferentiated internal "soup" of nutrients -- can suffice.
Somebody has to... (Score:5, Funny)
dear god (Score:5, Funny)
Firstly, that a 4 year old toddler can hold 3 kilo individual handheld weights, straight out.
Secondly, that 'many adults' can't hold that much weight. My leatherbound volume of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy has to weigh AT LEAST that much. What the hell is wrong with people?
Re:dear god (Score:3, Funny)
He's only 4 years old and can already carry his own laptop.
I'd hate to be the parent to ask "Where did you hide Daddy's laptop?".
Mutants (Score:5, Funny)
-Peter
Another Photo (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Another Photo (Score:3, Funny)
I told not to follow that link... That blonde does seem to have a certain fascination for that 'artifact'.
*never* been found in humans? (Score:5, Interesting)
For an example, there was a kid in my teeny little high school who had a muscular growth mutation. His muscles grew so much so fast that he had regular surgery to remove the excess lumps and knots of muscle. He didn't resemble a body builder. He looked like a mutation with lumps all over his body and scars where they had done surgery. I read this article and wondered if he has the same mutation.
Re:*never* been found in humans? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:*never* been found in humans? (Score:4, Interesting)
uberkind (Score:4, Interesting)
What I want to know is:
A. How soon will myostatin inhibiting pills become available and:
B. How soon before jock dads start feeding them to their toddlers.
Re:uberkind (Score:3, Informative)
The problem is that they don't work. It seems that you need to perform gene therapy in order to effectively achieve this kind of result.
makes you wonder... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:makes you wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)
Think about it. In the wild (i.e., in the hunter-gatherer mode of living that represents most of human existence to date) it's obviously useful to be strong -- but you also have to be lean enough to be fast on your feet, and be able to run long distances, and most important, not burn up too many calories just sitting there. Big huge people don't handle "lean times" (and no wild animal is ever too far away from potential starvation) nearly as well as little, wiry ones.
The pre-industrial agricultural period (roughly speaking, 8000 BC to 1800 AD -- again, a damn big chunk of time) probably exacerbated this with its frequent episodes of famine. These days, we regard it as an aberration when a few million people are starving to death somewhere; for most of recorded history, that has been a fear with which everyone had to live, all the time.
Dire wolves and sabretooth tigers died out. Grey wolves and mountain lions are still here.
Re:makes you wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)
You are quite correct in this. However what many people fail to see is that the cycles of starvation/famine that the "old world" had are quite similar to our boom and bust cycles of business. There would be good years and bad years and most of it was predicated on weather and later on the planning skills of th
Re:makes you wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)
As was already mentioned by several other people, the food intake is one factor. I won't go into that again.
What I will go into is the situation humans evolved in. Humans didn't evolve as brave muscular cavemen wrestling sabertooth tigers in 1-on-1 combat. Au contraire. It was more like a stealth game, if you will.
It was a rather small and wimpy fruit eating ape, only suddenly there were less and less trees with fruit. It had to find a new source of food.
Now contrary to popular belief (e.g., among rabid vegetarian zealots) not all animals can eat grass and leaves. Raw grass and leaves contain an enzyme that prevents you from extracting the protein in it. Unless you have the _very_ specialized digestive system of a herbivore, _or_ can boil those plants (high temperature destroys that enzyme), you can't survive on leaves. That ape didn't fit either category. (We're still millions of years before taming the fire.)
There is, howver, one thing that any animal can digest, and provides all the aminoacids needed: meat. Yes. Sorry, vegans. The human species evolved on _meat_.
There was another problem, however: that ape couldn't hunt. It didn't have the speed to catch an antelope, nor the claws or teeth to kill it with.
It had to survive by basically stealing food killed by the carnivores. The problem not ending up as second course for those carnivores.
It was a game of stealth, speed and cunning, not one of brutal hand-to-hand combat. Evolving into something more muscular and slower was _not_ an option. A small ape twice as muscular still can't kill a tiger with its bare hands.
The correct evolutionary path was to become more agile and, most importantly, _smarter_. Being able to improvise a plan raised your survival chances a lot more. And conversely, having a supply of meat allowed you to have a bigger brain. This cycle is what put us on the evolutionary course to what we are today.
I.e., in a way, yes, the correct evolutionary course was to become a scrawny smart geek. That was the survival trait.
And you can see it in how the species evolved. In the original ape, the male was about twice as big as the female, much more muscular and had bigger teeth and jaws. It was originally supposed to be, yes, the muscular jock that can defend his woman.
What the species evolved into, was something where the two genders are a lot more comparably sized. Most of the muscle advantage disappeared, and the big jaws were lost too.
It's easy to extrapolate that the brave and muscular jocks were the first to get out of the gene pool. That was not a survival trait.
Evolution IS a beauty contest (Score:5, Funny)
Hence the dazzling fan of the peacock, which the peacock uses to beat it's prey to death in a frightening, yet fashionable, display of evolutionary fitness.
There are many examples of evolution in weird directions for better sexual selection. For example song birds, fireflies, and Bill Clinton's exaggerated male chin.
"Better" isn't usually what we think it is (Score:3, Interesting)
Faster rabbit -- sometimes runs out and gets nabbed by a hawk when the more cautious ones are holding back.
Higher metabolism and endothermism -- requires more energy to keep going. (Similar cost for huge muscles.)
There's a popular idea that things are getting "better" through natural selection and evolution. The things is, our ideas of what "better" would be are usually kind of silly and superficial. "Better adapt
Myostatin in cattle (Score:5, Informative)
It's known already (Score:5, Informative)
July Scientific American (Score:5, Informative)
Re:July Scientific American (Score:5, Informative)
The method in the article is gene therapy, replacing the natural gene with a gene to block myostatin. The NY Times article talks about a drug antibody to prevent myostatin from reaching muscle satalite cells.
Will be used in athletics for a limited time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Will be used in athletics for a limited time... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will be used in athletics for a limited time... (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, that hasn't stopped numerous companies selling "myostatin inhibitors", but from what I've read, none of them actually work.
Re:Will be used in athletics for a limited time... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Will be used in athletics for a limited time... (Score:3, Funny)
Ladies and Gentlmen welcome to Bagdad Olympics 2044 were all sorts of mutants will compete for the gold medal.
For the 300m sprint we have Rabbit-Man with a third leg from LegBotics(TM) with the capability to run(TM) and jump(PATENT PENDING) as high as 4m.
Next to him we have MuscleMan(TM) with genetically engineered MuscleSoft(TM) muscles that can boost performance to all time records.
We hope(TM) you enjoy(TM) the games! Here are a few messages for you...
Re:Will be used in athletics for a limited time... (Score:3, Interesting)
The increase in muscle came with no additional work, the mice were essential sedentary, but still gained 15-25% muscle mass.
Selective use (Score:3, Interesting)
In general, I'm with the parent poster on this one - more is not always better, and there is likely a down side to this. However, as humans really can't say one way or the other. Perhaps you need this mutation AND another one, two, or 12 to really be "better". Even a "bad" mutation may be good when taken with another set of modifications we don't know about. Embrace genetic diversity.
Natural Selection for Pro Athletes (Score:3, Interesting)
They happen 'all the time' -- often enough -- but they mostly just don't result in an advantage that'll make you more successful, natural selection wise.
You'd have to think, though, that dying at 35 might not stop some people. Tonight's the NBA draft. There's a 7 foot-5 inch European center who'll get taken mid-lottery or so. The kid has a growth hormone problem, diagnosed, that he's being treated for; teams regard it as an advantage, pretty clear
You wouldn't like me when I'm angry... (Score:5, Funny)
my05t/\t1/\/ (Score:5, Funny)
Baby's Father.. (Score:5, Funny)
There was no information on the baby's father
Second Coming of Christ! This time, he's kicking your ass!!
Re:Baby's Father.. (Score:4, Funny)
(see the 0-budget movie Jesus Christ: Vampire Hunter)
bodybuilders have been using this stuff (Score:3, Informative)
Unfortunately, I left the position before I had a chance to discuss with any first-hand users of these things, but it looks like they're still being sold at various web sites, so somebody must think they're working.
Muscular Dystrophy (Score:3, Interesting)
Mutations, founder's effect, and inbreeding (Score:5, Informative)
From this MSNBC article [msn.com]:
The boy has two copies. He could (absent an extremely unlikely second identical mutation on the other copy of the same gene) only get one from his mother. The other had to come from his father. The mutation is very rare. The mother has four male relatives with one copy of the mutation. The identity of the father has not been disclosed.
Anyone care to connect the dots?
I'm not pointing this out to be cruel or catty; I'm pointing it put because it's a good example of what's called the "founder's effect" [wikipedia.org], a mechanism by which mutations -- by definition unique or nearly unique events -- became part of a general population.
Since this child has two copies of the mutation, not only are phenotypic effects greater -- he's even more muscular than his mother who has a single copy -- but all of his children will have at least a single copy, like his mother.
Were the conditions for founder's effect stronger -- that is, if he were a member of a smaller and more isolated population than modern Germany -- one can easily see how inbreeding could result in the mutation becoming common throughout that population.
When two persons with a single copy of the mutation breed, one-quarter of their offspring (on average) will have, like the child being studied, two copies of the mutated form (or allele) of the gene (and no copies of the gene's normal allele), one-quarter will have two copies of the normal allele, and one-half of the offspring will have, like the mother, one mutated allele and one "normal" allele.
But when a person with two copies breeds with a person with a single copy, one-half the offspring (on average) will have two copies of the mutation, and one-half will have one copy of it.
So if there's any preferential benefit to having the mutation -- if those with the mutation do better and so have more offspring -- and if there's the in-breeding of founder's effect, the mutation should become common in the founder population.
Indeed, it's likely that founder's effect, along with environmental conditions, explains why Germans and other Europeans, despite being descended from Africans 40,000 years ago, are white rather than black: being white is bad under the Africa sun, as, unprotected, it will lead to skin cancer and death by about age twelve. But being black in the weaker sunlight of Europe prevents the metabolization of vitamin D, leading to the weakened bones of rickets. In Africa, mutations that lead to less melanin production and whiteness also lead to death -- but in Europe it allowed a longer, better life.
But how did lessened melanin production and "whiteness" spread in Europe? Likely through founder's effect in small and isolated inbreeding populations -- but certainly not because of any "Aryan" superiority.
Re:Mutations, founder's effect, and inbreeding (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm going to guess that you weren't living like humans lived in Africa 40,000 -- or 120,000 -- years ago: unclothed except for skins (and many days would be too hot for wearing skins), spending most of the day under the hot sun gathering uncultivated fruits and vegetables or running down undomesticated game, without sunscreen or medical supplies beyond naturally occurring plants, with no doctors or even any understanding of why skin cancer occurs.
And quite possibly before natural mutations offering resistance to skin cancers had spread through the human population (by the death of those without those mutations).
And I spend enough time outdoors, that after moving back to the USA some of my friends had a hard time recognizing me when I lost my (very) dark tan. (yes I am now "pasty white boy")
And even with all the modern conveniences of (opaque but light enough to wear in the heat) clothing, sun-screen, and medical care, your body caught enough sunlight to provoke increased melanin production even in your white, European descended body.
I not trying to be overly critical of you here; it's normal for people to think that the conditions that they have personally experienced obtained universally and throughout all of human history. Part of the challenge of learning history or understanding evolution (human or otherwise) is to begin to grasp the enormous differences and the great epochs of time -- time far, far in excess of the span of any single human's life, time measure in the millions of years -- that separate us from our origins.
Let's play a game by pretending that every year only lasts a minute. It's 2004 today, so, by this game's metric, a "minute" ago it was 2003, and thirty-five minutes ago -- a little over half an hour ago -- Neil Armstrong, in 1969, set foot on the moon. In these terms, World War Two ended just a minute less than an hour ago. Three hours and forty-eight minutes ago -- in 1776 -- Thomas Jefferson declared independence for one nation while, essentially simultaneously in our terms, Adam Smith revealed an Invisible Hand that regulated commerce among all nations.
Each hour is comprised of sixty minutes, each day of twenty-four hours, for a total of 1440 minutes per day. So by our scheme, one "day" ago, 1440 minutes ago, an English King named Riothamus -- or Arthur -- had just recently failed to keep south-western England from plunging into barbarity in 564. Since Arthur's reign, the rest of "yesterday" saw the Dark Ages in Europe offset by the flowering of Islamic science and mathematics, the rebirth of Europe in the Renaissance, the exploration and colonization of most of the world by Europeans, and, an hour ago, the beginning of the atomic age. All this in one busy "day".
Even given the brevity of our metric, compressing one year of 525600 minutes into a single minute, it's still easily possible to recite the salient historical events on a year in the sixty seconds we are given, and even include our own particular history: "1903: first heavier-than-air flight; Grandma born." or "1943: Battle of Guadalcanal, Allied invasion of Italy, Warsaw Ghetto uprising against Nazis, Dad born."
But what's most interesting isn't those years, like 1943, crammed full of events, but the far greater number of years which our histories don't distinguish from one another. Two days ago, 48 hours ago, we come to the year 875 BC (since there's no year zero, 1 AD being preceded immediately by 1 BC). While I'm sure that a historian of that era could come with an interesting event of that year, the nearest I can come up with is the ascension of Osorkon II to the pharoah's throne in Egypt the next year in 874 BC. The remainder of day two will be pretty packed: Rome will be founded and will reign for most of the day, Christ will be born and crucified in a brief half-hour - but will give rise to over a "day"
Look out! (Score:4, Funny)
There's a reason for having the myostatin (Score:3, Informative)
There's normally a reason for having a tight regulation of muscle growth in animals, as there's a reason for regulating cell divisions and changes that lead to growth and proliferation overall in all sorts of multicellular organisms (otherwise you'd be just a big blob of tumour).
So, taking out that regulatory protein myostatin will not perhaps be the healthies thing to do if you want to increase muscle size, as you'll just probably end up getting a heart-attack and all sorts of other nasty muscular problems with the most essential muscle tissues you have (heart and intestine at least). This sort of issues occur in GM-modified cattle with the similar myostatin mutation very regularly, and human as another not-too-distant mammal will probably not be any more safe from these problems.
muscular dystrophy (Score:4, Interesting)
Myostatin blockers (Score:5, Interesting)
Myostatin and Myostatin Inhibitors: The Next Big Supplement Scam [ast-ss.com]
Don't know if this is the first. (Score:3, Interesting)
I once saw a program on Discovery about the guy whos muscles grew indefinitelly, even w/o any physical activity. He had to have them removed surgically from time to time.
I'm not sure if that was the same condition, but I don't think I'd like to have it.
Robert
Evolution (Score:3, Interesting)
A recent paper indicated that myostatin might normally function to keep satellite cells quiescent. Without myostatin, he said, the satellite cells might be so active building muscle that they become depleted early in life. ... will his satellite cells be used up so that his muscles start to deflate when he is 30 or so?
I'm wondering if that could be it. But then getting weak after age 30 doesn't sound like a big deal to me because humans' reproductive peak occurs well below that age. Any bio people have a clue about any other possibilities?
Re:Evolution (Score:3, Insightful)
Is he unbreakable? (Score:4, Funny)
Will the Olympics allow mutants to compete? (Score:4, Interesting)
Spooky thought... (Score:4, Insightful)
I hate to sound the banjo alarm, but I suspect the easiest way for these genes to double up in the bairn would be in a case of incest.
Eep. Wonder if they are recessive?Picture at Tribune (Score:3, Informative)
Picture (Score:3, Informative)
Bodies like G(r)eek Gods (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, although the scientists are moving cautiously on this, the bodybuilding-supplement industry has already jumped on the bandwagon (as usual). There's already a "natural" product (their quotes) on the market that claims to block myostatin. As always, I take their claims with several pounds of salt
Obviously I'll wait for the real scientists' findings, but a drug for this could be a real lifesaver for the modern geek^H^H^H^H white collar worker. Basically it causes your body to spend all its extra resources building & fueling muscle, instead of growing fat cells and dealing with hyperglycemia. We'd all be in great shape; that is, until the inevitable post-apocalyptic famine hit
This is a child’s misfortune. (Score:5, Interesting)
This condition has been documented in animals, which have all died at a fairly young age.
This is just this child's misfortune to be the first documented human case.
Re:This is a childs misfortune. (Score:4, Interesting)
ObSoutpark Quote (Score:3, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Poor Kid (Score:5, Insightful)
You doubt me. Call me back in 2050 and we'll see.
Myostatin blocker available (Score:5, Interesting)
Cytodyne Technologies (same company who sells Xenadrine an Ephedra based (lately in the US ephedra free fat burner))
Anyway, the product is called Myo-Blast CSP^3.
Anyone interested might consider Juiced Protein from Pinnacle (pretty OK taste compared to other protein shakes)
Why ? Why not. I am not a Gym freak, but I do st 45-60 minutes weight training +
40-60 minutes cardio
While I am against steroids I happily take an algae based product or bioengineered protein
as a little experiment - at the end probably they makes less harm than a bigmac
ahm + I am a vegetarian who does lotsa sports so extra protein is welcome
for those who might wonder: myostatin is responsible for skeletal muscle! Your tongue, and your heart muscle won't grow bigger than it is if you block that enzyme (I hope it really)
I recommed these searches "myostatin cow" : http://images.google.com/images?q=myostatin%20cow
myostatin:
http:
cheers
What a coincidence (Score:5, Interesting)
If I were a researcher who had solved the various difficulties (heart problems, etc.) with the process, and I wanted a secret human trial, I'd find a mother which already had one gene as a cover and make sure there was no information available on the father to give away the fact he did not contain the other gene, or falsify it if there were. Then, I'd act real surprised when the baby was born.
It could be legit, but the rarity of the mutation makes the whole thing sound suspicious to me
baby talk (Score:4, Funny)
Translation: "Hi. I'm Hans, and I am here to 'Pump you Up!'"
Re:No limit to muscles? (Score:5, Informative)
enlarged heart - much like someone suffering from chronic ostructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This causes the heart to work more and eventually fail
pseudo neuronal degeneration - failure of the nervous system to keep rewiring itself to accomodate the new muscles. This would lead to all sorts of failure in motor control, and eventual paralysis
These are just two that I can think of off of the top of my head. There may be other, unforeseen consequences. Of course, he could live a "normal" healthy life and get about 20 gold medals in weight lifting.
Re:Listen to me now.... (Score:4, Funny)
We are Hans and Frans, and we're going to PUMP YOU UP!
Re:So Fark cliches are invading Slashdot now? (Score:3)