Scientists Genetically Engineer Pigs Immune To Costly Disease (theguardian.com) 80
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: The trial, led by the University of Edinburgh's Roslin Institute, showed that the pigs were completely immune to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS), a disease that is endemic across the globe and costs the European pig industry nearly $2 billion in pig deaths and decreased productivity each year.
Pigs infected with PRRS are safe to eat but the virus causes the animals breathing problems, causes deaths in piglets and can cause pregnant sows to lose their litter. There is no effective cure or vaccine, and despite extensive biosecurity measures about 30% of pigs in England are thought to be infected at any given time. After deleting a small section of DNA that leaves pigs vulnerable to the disease, the animals showed no symptoms or trace of infection when intentionally exposed to the virus and when housed for an extended period with infected siblings. The study has been published in the Journal of Virology.
Pigs infected with PRRS are safe to eat but the virus causes the animals breathing problems, causes deaths in piglets and can cause pregnant sows to lose their litter. There is no effective cure or vaccine, and despite extensive biosecurity measures about 30% of pigs in England are thought to be infected at any given time. After deleting a small section of DNA that leaves pigs vulnerable to the disease, the animals showed no symptoms or trace of infection when intentionally exposed to the virus and when housed for an extended period with infected siblings. The study has been published in the Journal of Virology.
Re: Reminiscing about the movie "I am Legend" (Score:1)
I, too, base my fears of progress on movies designed to sell a fear of progress as entertainment.
Re: (Score:2)
I can make the case that, so far, the atomic bomb has kept us from having WW3 as the major powers can't afford that kind of destruction. Better to get along somehow than bomb civilization back to the stone age. Hard to actually "win" a war when all your cities glow in the dark without electricity. The same with bio and chemical. The planet is too small for the consequences. Hell, even Hitler didn't use gas in combat. Only for ethnic cleansing in controlled environments. WWI convinced the military that gas i
This should be all we focus on as a species (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Not before I eat them.
Re: (Score:1)
Will the pigs get cancers?
Not before I eat them.
And if that genetic modification changes something in those pigs' meat that promotes cancer in you (regardless of effect on the pig's health), would you care? If research team says that's not the case, could you trust them? Could those scientists even be sure themselves, that they've 'covered all bases' ?
Lots of questions. Probably a lot more I didn't think of. And possibly even more answers that will be MIA. There's just 1 thing I am sure about: (some) scientists will probably be more confident in makin
Re: (Score:2)
It might just be a little bit safer replacing that gene sequence that was removed with something non-coding for anything.
In DOS game days, you silence a noisy game that didn't have a volume control by replacing the sequence E6 60 with 90 90, which replaced out 90h,AX with NOP, NOP. If you were to just delete those two bytes the whole game would just crash. There's always the risk that something else might use that sequence E6 60 like a jump address.
Re: But will the pigs get cancers? (Score:1)
Thousands of mutations naturally occur in every pig. Adding one is not likely to affect us. And pig lifespan isnâ(TM)t an issue.
Re: (Score:1)
This, totally this. One would be rightfully scared if someone where suggesting that they modify your DNA using CRISPR. That literally means rewriting the code that makes you, you.
But the fears of GMO foods harming consumers are simply hysteria, no different than the uninformed panic of Y2Kers. By what mechanism could these modified organisms could harm you? There isn't one.
Our bodies are very adept at ripping apart the cells we eat into their constituent elements. So long as the organism isn't producing a p
Re:But will the pigs get cancers? (Score:5, Informative)
This article describes the purpose of CD163:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
It is a receptor for hemoglobin, and is involved in hemoglobin clearance after intracerebral hemorrhage. It is elevated for anyone with myelo-monocytic leukaemia and infection.
http://jvi.asm.org/content/91/... [asm.org]
Re:This should be all we focus on as a species (Score:5, Insightful)
Ethics aside, because nobody in an emergency room wouldn't want a cure.
I’m not sure we can genetically engineer a cure for gunshot wounds or car accidents.
Re: (Score:1)
I’m not sure we can genetically engineer a cure for gunshot wounds or car accidents.
That's probably a good thing, though. Imagine getting this phone call: "I'm sorry Mr. Wagon, but your wife was killed while being carjacked by a genetically modified pig. Witnesses report that he opened the door and threw her onto the pavement, shot her in the head, ran over her half a dozen times, and then got out and picked up her money off of the ground. One witness added, 'she only loaded $13. Why he have to do her like that?' and then started casually walking into the wall before losing connection."
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure we can genetically engineer a cure for gunshot wounds or car accidents.
Well, maybe we can remove the "violent" and "criminal" genes from folks who are violent criminals who use guns to commit crimes. "A Clockwork Orange" solution.
For car driver folks who run over pedestrian folks because the driver is watching TV instead of looking at the road . . . we can remove the "idiot" and "asshole" genes.
Re: (Score:3)
We as a species IMO should be focusing 75% of our resources on biology for curing diseases and life extension,
Oh, sure. What we really need is nobody dying any more. There simply aren't enough of us at the moment.
There is lots of space in this universe
In the Universe, yes, but we can't get to any of it. We only have access to one tiny dot and we're busy fucking it up as fast as we can.
Re: (Score:2)
We as a species IMO should be focusing 75% of our resources on biology for curing diseases and life extension,
Oh, sure. What we really need is nobody dying any more. There simply aren't enough of us at the moment.
So ... you'd like to end medical research into curing and preventing disease, in order to control population? Or you just enjoy clever ripostes?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, sure. What we really need is nobody dying any more. There simply aren't enough of us at the moment.
If all the pessimistic tech-hating hippies get their wish and quietly die off, there will be plenty of rom for the rest of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Using the word "all" there is really weird. I couldn't argue if you said reducing diseases was extremely important, but other things are also important.
OTOH, the question in my mind was "What does this section of DNA do besides allowing the virus access?". It's true that it's possible it has no valid function, but this is unlikely. Much DNA that's been called "junk" has turned out to have important functionality when more closely examined. Of course, some hasn't. Some was never functional, like the gen
How do you like your pork? (Score:2)
I like my pork without respiratory diseases.
A loinly disease.
--
Pun's-errific -- Jack Hoffman
Re: (Score:2)
It's inappropriate to nuke Bayer from orbit. Some of their facilities are near beautiful buildings.
Disease resistant pigs? (Score:1)
So they've created disease resistant pigs? Meh. Let me know when they fly.
Genetically Engineered Immortal Pigs? (Score:2)
I for one welcome our new pork-based overlords.
Re: (Score:2)
kamers pigman (Score:3, Funny)
Meat Medicine (Score:4, Interesting)
Pigs are biologically similar enough to humans that we ought to genetically engineer them to be immune to various ailments that also affect humans -- particularly the ailments that make them less likely to make it to the dinner plate. This'll lower the cost of meat production, and simultaneously lead to medical advances for humans.
Re: (Score:2)
So what's that section of DNA do? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
More likely in the wild state they don't tend to catch the virus, because they don't live as close to other pigs that are infected.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not, because there weren't any.
Oryx (Score:2)
and Crake
This is huge if it ever reaches the market. (Score:5, Informative)
Option 1: stay PRRS Free
Animals are healthier, perform better, and require less medical intervention. Great! However, biosecurity measures are prodigious, can be super expensive, and if they fail it will cost you a lot of animals and money.
A small University run operation I worked on sold ~500 nursery piglets every 2 weeks. When they broke with PRRS the number of viable pigs was cut in half in the first group. Bottomed our at 5 pigs surviving to weaning before it started to recover. All told we lost some where in the order of 2,000 piglets over about 2 months. We also lost about 10% of the sows over the same period. Mostly the younger ones.
Option 2. Manage a PRRS positive herd.
Animals are always a little sick, a little less productive, and require a little more TLC, but you mostly avoid the dramatic >90% losses of an accure outbreak. Flair ups top out closer to 25-50%.
Genetically immune pigs would save literally millions of pigsâ(TM) lives, improve their welfare at the same time, and improve the environmental impact of swine production by reducing waste (feed, medications, etc spent on pigs that die due to the disease). Will we forgo all of those advantages because GMO makes some people scared? I sure as hell hope not, but wonâ(TM)t be holding my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
For other diseases we've used mass euthanasia with some sort of a loss support program to eradicate highly virulent diseases like Hoof and Mouth disease, with the goal of having an entire nation be considered "Free" of the disease. If a farm then eventually pops up positive, we do it all over again. We've not used this approach with PRRSv
Re:This is huge if it ever reaches the market. (Score:4, Interesting)
You are correct. But the problem is it means replacing our pigs. This solves just one problem (PRRS) but there are many other issues. I've spent decades breeding our nine genetic lines of hogs on our farm to thrive in our climate, be able to eat pasture as the main component of their diet (80%DMI), for good temperament and 33 other criteria.
So I can now throw out decades of work for a single solution (PRRS) resistance? Not going to happen. Their PRRS resistant pigs will die in our climate (USDA Zone 3) so it is pointless to replace our genetics with their genetics.
What we need is the ability to edit our existing pig genetic lines to fix the PRRS susceptibility, as well as other things. Then it becomes interesting.
Re: (Score:3)
It also appears as though you are operating under the assumption that what these researchers have achieved cannot be achieved in the breeds you draw from. If each of the primary breeders deliberately starts introducing (via
Re: (Score:2)
"You don't have to throw out your progress. Just select sires and sows who are immune. Yes, that'll require some trade offs, but breeding selection has always required tradeoffs."
Based on your response I think you don't understand how genetic selection works and how GMOs work. This article was about doing genetic engineering to solve PRRS, a disease of pigs. That solves the PRRS in the single genetic line that the scientists work with. To move those genetics into other lines will take decades of work. Furth
Re: This is huge if it ever reaches the market. (Score:3)
As for the dig at the end about my experience. PhD in animal science from Purdue university and 10+ years in the field since then. Now,
Re: (Score:2)
"The industry has embarked on massive changes in the emetics of pigs before. The average pig today measures back fat in milimeters at slaughter."
mm is the measure but that is simply a definition of the units, you're failing to specify the quantity so it isn't meaningful.
That said I will agree with you that the commodity market pigs are too lean. This problem started back in the 1970's as pork became "The Other White Meat" and too lean losing flavor as it lost fat. That was a mistake by the industry that the
Re: (Score:2)
I also wasn’t attempting to lecture, by which I mean “tell you something you don’t already know”, but to draw your attention to a major trend in swine breedin
Re: (Score:2)
Yet you continue to make assumptions about me, implying that I'm uneducated, when you have no knowledge about me. You're trolling.
My point was this isn't useful as a genetic line.
It is useful as a genetic tool if applied to existing lines.
Based on your most recent response you at least acknowledge this although you continue to be insulting.
Re: (Score:2)
A. you knew about the change in backfat thickness over the last couple of decades, and the amount work that represented
B. you were aware that CRSPR would make it possible to do this kind of manipulation on living animals, in your barn, without having to change sire selection You turned the topic to experience and qualifications with this line
Based on your response I think you don't understand how genetic selection works and how GMOs work
At this point I chose to highlight that I am not ignorant of the subjects, but that I am no expert either. You th
Ob (Score:2)
In Soviet Russia, immortal porcine overlards welcome you!!!!
Non-GMO Solution (Score:3)
Now that they've identified that the elimination of that particular gene will produce immunity, they need to develop a quick way to test for it. Then test all the pigs they can find who aren't obviously infected. What are the odds of some pigs already having this trait? If they can find it as a mutation, then they can bypass all the GMO restrictions.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up as insightful!
Re: (Score:2)
Now that they've identified that the elimination of that particular gene will produce immunity, they need to develop a quick way to test for it. Then test all the pigs they can find who aren't obviously infected. What are the odds of some pigs already having this trait? If they can find it as a mutation, then they can bypass all the GMO restrictions.
Which, of course, just highlights how utterly ridiculous the GMO restrictions are.
Really, which is better, a targeted, narrowly-focused engineered "mutation" or one that arose from pure random chance, along with who knows how many other utterly random changes? It's like the choice between having your appendectomy performed using a scalpel or a shotgun -- and believing that the shotgun approach is safer/better!
What it boils down to is that the vast majority of humanity does not understand evolution. As
Omg (Score:2)