genetic engineering

RE: genetic engineering

Nature is wise, so give me good natural food. I don´t know if these products are good or bad, but I seems to me really suspicious that the genetically modified food producers, don´t want the comsumers to know it on the labels of the products. That´s cheating. There are no studies which clearly indicate that these products are safe. So meanwhile I don´t have evidence…NO THANKS

RE: genetic engineering

“I’m not saying its a bad thing, I have a degree in it, like anything with this potential for good and bad it needs to be handled with kid gloves.”

Things we create and knowledge is not inherently good or bad… anything can be used for good or bad purposes.
In a post above I mentioned ICBMs for this very reason… they threatened the destruction of human dominance of this world and to a lesser extent still do now but they also lead to space exploration and will lead to us leaving this planet… the only real defence from a large asteroid hit is to have humans on mars and the moon…
(note I didn’t say “destroy the world” regarding nuclear weapons because lets face it it would only kill off us humans and most of the large land mammals… the cockroaches will survive…)

RE: genetic engineering

They wouldn’t inject the DNA straight into the embryo, the basic steps are:

Take an egg cell (female gamete) from the Ostrich.

Remove the Nucleus/DNA from the cell.

Then you would take the Nucleus/DNA from the Moa and inject it into the cell/Nucleus.

A few chemical steps maybe needed to start the process, and then basically you wait with fingers crossed.

If the cell divides and continues to develop you will then have a Moa clone of your very own (depending on your view, the mother cell still contains Ostrich DNA in the mitochondria. Some academics still insist that a method of this nature can never produce a clone, but instead a hybrid.)

Of course the chances of this happening is 1000.s to one. Even today hte techniques are very hit and miss.

GE is still a fairly young science, we’ve only known about DNA/Chromosomes for 50 to 60 years!

I think the problem is that the labs are developing new techniques and increasing our understanding about the very base of life, but the politics are far behind. All these labs are desparate to tell the world that they can engineer glow in the dark mice (it has been done!). They want to be able to use it in the real world, christ glow in the dark pets, you know there would be people out there who would buy one. Wether its the thrill of playing god or just stepping on ground which has never been trod we need to be careful with GE.

I’m not saying its a bad thing, I have a degree in it, like anything with this potential for good and bad it needs to be handled with kid gloves.

Simmer

RE: genetic engineering

First of all I am not a GE expert either… I still think we can talk about it though.

“Your wrong Garry, whether you have semen of a ram or an actual ram, either way its not genetically altered. Yes its possible to replicate changes that occure natuarally with GE, its also possible to go far beyond what can be done with natural breeding. “

Each cell in an animal or a plant contains the DNA that controls its growth. When I am talking about AI I am talking about someone finding a Ram with good bloodlines that has possibly been blood tested for genetic disease and has been cleared. This happens now in deciding what will become breeding stock. An animal that gives very good results from a lab will be used to “Father” lambs by being a semen donor… for a very large price. This happens now.
When genetically altering animals or plants it is much easier to do when the animal or plant in question has not yet been conceived.
Only the original cell needs to be altered… as the cell splits and multiplies the changes are present in all of the produced cells so the semen for AI is merely semen from a genetically good animal that has been selected… conversely the ram that was genetically modified at conception is genetically modified in the sense that the changes made to the embryo have been reproduced to produce the newborn ram.
We share 97% or 98% of our DNA with Apes. So a change of 2-3% can change a Human child to an Ape child. Large parts of DNA is actually redundant and is no longer used so obviously the real difference between us is actually greater than it first appears, but the basics like arms, legs, torso, head, eyes, ears, facial expressions etc are very similar.

The numbers of species becoming extinct every day suggests a DNA record of all animals would be a good idea.
I have heard talk as I mentioned above of GE’ing a Moa.
The method they would use would be to introduce Moa DNA into an ostridge embryo… it is not a case of injecting a fully grown ostridge with Moa DNA and it deforms and mutates into a Moa… if that were the case everytime you ate a burger with bacon and cheese you’d turn into a pig… and possibly an onion… a self stuffing pig… awesome!!! }>

RE: genetic engineering

In reality the difference is that now the farmer gets just the semen from the ram… with GE he will get the ram.
Obviously the ram will have to mature before it can be used for breeding stock but at least the farmer will know exactly what he is getting.

Your wrong Garry, whether you have semen of a ram or an actual ram, either way its not genetically altered. Yes its possible to replicate changes that occure natuarally with GE, its also possible to go far beyond what can be done with natural breeding. Sofar, we havent experienced a breakdown resulting from a GE mistake, but its very possible. Regretably I cant back up the example I brought up about the GE salman with more specifac info about the disaster that could be wrought with its breeding with natural species, it was just something I came across a year or two ago.

Introducing a GE modified member to the rest of the population will not give all of the members of that population the new changed genes… patting a dog doesn’t transfer dog genes to your hand.
If the introduced GE member with some genetic error or weakness is allowed to reproduce then its offspring have something to worry about but the other members of the lifeform type are quite safe. If the error is fatal then the death of the individual will stop the bad genes propagating…

Your wrong Garry, if you breed a pony with a thoroughbred, that ponys genetics will effect all its decendants, its mathematically predictable just howmuch change it will do. With GE your completely splicing out a section of gene and puting in something different. As is seen sofar, species are able to withstand these abrupt change that have been tried sofar. What you cant seem to understand is that GE doesnt wash out, its a permant part of the Species. If things go bad say with the GE corn that has been found in europe, theres nothing original to go back to because its not isolated, its being intermixed. With natural mistakes you can just breed out problems as you say. With GE its more that dominant and resesive naturally occuring GE, its something entirely new that has changed the species thats out of the control of normal mutations.

Im not an expert on this subject, I wouldnt even say Im knowedgeable. But your clearly blind to what the basics of what GE is and what it can do. I have a feeling youll respond the same as you have these last few posts of yours. In that case Ill have to live this dicuscian as it stands.

RE: genetic engineering

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 24-08-02 AT 05:22 AM (GMT)]”Your hooked on this idea that GE plant/animals will create an entirely different breed that cant pollenate/interbreed with normal stock. “

Mixtec… you are not reading what I am writing… look at my last post.

####################
Of course it will effect the normal stock… that is the purpose.
There is no difference between getting a strong healthy Ram with good bloodlines in to inseminate your ewes and improve the quality or texture of your wool or lower the fat content in the meat of the offspring whether that Ram be from a different farm 1,000km away or genetically modified from one of the farmers own Rams.
GE does not produce robo rams that are alien and have ammonia filled tentacles.
####################

Very simply Farmers currently improve the quality of their stock by artificaily inseminating their ewes with semen from rams with good bloodlines and good genetic qualities… like fine wool and lean meat.
With GE instead of getting the semen of a genetically good ram as they do now they might send the egg and semen of sheep that are in his own flock. In the lab the egg is fertilised and the genes altered to the required specs. The result is a male or female with the good genes. This animal will be taken by the farmer and used as breeding stock… if I didn’t think the GE animal could breed with other animals I would have said the farmers entire flock would have to be genetically altered.
In reality the difference is that now the farmer gets just the semen from the ram… with GE he will get the ram.
Obviously the ram will have to mature before it can be used for breeding stock but at least the farmer will know exactly what he is getting.

“Its said that one fertalized salman if it were to escape form the pen could wipe out the entire species of salman, especially because the GE grow large faster which would make them a more attractive mate. “

GE animals and plants are not Psycho killers. Unless every single fish egg survived to adulthood and all the other fish were killed by some disease that did not effect the GE fish then that is just rubbish.

Take 1,000 people. If one is genetically altered to be faster or stronger… yes he or she may dominate the group he or she is in but to suggest that the other 999 will be wiped out is rediculous.
In some animal groups monogomy is practised. Going back to the human example the GE human would have to impregnate all of the females every time they are able to conceive to wipe out the other human genes. Even then if the GE person is male the non GE genes of the female partners will be part of the genetic makeup of the children that are conceived and will not be lost.
Remember High School… there were the cool kids and there were the rest of the kids. Did only the cool kids find girlfriends/boyfriends?

“What exactly the limit that a scientist can alter a species without either causeing weakness to the breed or unforseen genetic errors that could destroy the breed itself”

Introducing a GE modified member to the rest of the population will not give all of the members of that population the new changed genes… patting a dog doesn’t transfer dog genes to your hand.
If the introduced GE member with some genetic error or weakness is allowed to reproduce then its offspring have something to worry about but the other members of the lifeform type are quite safe. If the error is fatal then the death of the individual will stop the bad genes propagating… right now life support machines plus “society” that keeps alive and gives some quality of life to humans that might otherwise have died are currently used… if you are afraid of bad genes then I guess you are in favour of Mentally Handicapped and other people with similar problems or genetic diseases like Altzheimers being castrated at birth?
Often bad genes are not that bad… I am quite tall… it is useful sometimes but more often than not it is a hinderance… is being tall good or bad?

“You say you dont mind a human being GE, can you give me some kind of percentage as to howmuch genetic alteration can be done to stay safe? Is their a limit?”

Personally I think it should be used for medical reasons only. I don’t think having future generations of children made to order is a good thing but I guess it is probably going to happen anyway… money talks louder than politics or morals.
Genetic changes are normal and natural… otherwise children would be clones of their parents. We have already upset the balance of nature by assisting those who would have otherwise died at birth or before sexual maturity to survive and reproduce. This adds to genetic diversity but it also means genetic diseases are becoming more widespread. GE is a solution to this problem.

RE: genetic engineering

Garry- Your hooked on this idea that GE plant/animals will create an entirely different breed that cant pollenate/interbreed with normal stock. Your wrong, as I mentioned, GE corn has been found to be mixed in european corn where GE is not used. Yes GE animals can wipe out an entire spieces. GE salman are being farmed in pools inland, and their requesting that they be allowed to grow them in pens in the sea. Its said that one fertalized salman if it were to escape form the pen could wipe out the entire species of salman, especially because the GE grow large faster which would make them a more attractive mate. What exactly the limit that a scientist can alter a species without either causeing weakness to the breed or unforseen genetic errors that could destroy the breed itself? You say you dont mind a human being GE, can you give me some kind of percentage as to howmuch genetic alteration can be done to stay safe? Is their a limit?

RE: genetic engineering

“You seem perfectly assured that genetists can freely alter genes in plants and animals all they want and it will only result in improved genes and an overall improved breeds.”

No true.
As I mentioned in a previous post GE involves altering genes but natural selection will be replaced by a more sophisticated selection process. ie non viable GE products will simply not survive, while less than what is considered useful or sucessful products will be discarded in the persuit of the goal… whatever that may be. (ie faster growing wheat etc.)
The idea that a human could stumble upon some discarded super wheat and eat it and then grow a third arm is rediculous.

Sure there will be mistakes and errors… why should the future be any different from the past in that respect?
The only real fear I have about GE is what chem and bio warfare specialists will be able to do with it… but then they will be working with these technologies whether they are banned or not.

” Your simply wrong about GE interbreeding with normal stock not effecting the regular stock.”

Of course it will effect the normal stock… that is the purpose.
There is no difference between getting a strong healthy Ram with good bloodlines in to inseminate your ewes and improve the quality or texture of your wool or lower the fat content in the meat of the offspring whether that Ram be from a different farm 1,000km away or genetically modified from one of the farmers own Rams.
GE does not produce robo rams that are alien and have ammonia filled tentacles.

“What its going to take is a catastrafe to a foodcrop or livestalk species (not breed mind you, the entire species) and then society will say, oh yeah, this GE bussiness is powerfull and dangerous if used improperly, maybe we should have kept this research where research belongs, in a lab. “

You can’t wipe out an entire species that easily. Even if you sepcifically genetically engineered a type of horse that became impotent after 10 generations you would have to track down every single horse in the world… domestic and wild and genetically alter them.
The other way to spread is via natural reproduction… how quickly do you think that will spread… and how reliably will is spread… remember even if both parents have the impotence gene there is no guarantee that their offspring will have it as an active gene or merely be a carrier for the impotence gene.
To guarantee the genes are properly GE’d you have to fertilise the egg with a genetically altered sperm in a lab… otherwise it is normal reproduction and nature rules there… anything can happen though as I said above a stong Ram with good quality wool adding its genes to the gene pool of a flock will improve the average quality of the flock… that is why AI is such a large business. (Artificial Insemination… something most Farmers are used to and why these farmers are comfortable with GE.)

RE: genetic engineering

Garry- Garry I really cant think of anyway to answere your post. You seem perfectly assured that genetists can freely alter genes in plants and animals all they want and it will only result in improved genes and an overall improved breeds. Your simply wrong about GE interbreeding with normal stock not effecting the regular stock. What its going to take is a catastrafe to a foodcrop or livestalk species (not breed mind you, the entire species) and then society will say, oh yeah, this GE bussiness is powerfull and dangerous if used improperly, maybe we should have kept this research where research belongs, in a lab. It shouldnt take this to long to happen though as about 99% of biotec scientists and the farmers who buy from them are in agreement with you. The danger is on my side of the fence also though, alot of anti GE activists such as in greenpeace are basically a bunch of collage flunkies who have no idea at all what GE is, and have targeted the consumers with the danger to consumption scare. So all this this “crying wolf” has only cemented public indiference.

RE: genetic engineering

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 22-08-02 AT 10:19 AM (GMT)]”Garry,your absolutely right about humans becoming weaker due to the absence of natural selection. But why dont you attribute the same to plants and animals? “

Because things haven’t changed that much for wild or domesticated (for food) animals. Wild animals still face enemies and dangers. Widespread alterations to their habitat often mean they must relocate or change their tactics but they don’t sit at home in front of TV guzzling beer eating yesterdays pizza… more likely they have to run a gauntlet of dangers and get the small pieces of pizza from a bin or rubbish dump. (thanks to our wasteful society scavangers thrive near humans as long as they can maintain a low profile and not be targeted for culling).

Sick or weak wild animals generally die. Sick or weak cattle/sheep/etc etc may not be allowed to die but they certainly are not used for breeding stock so their genes are not passed to a new generation.

It is roughly the same with plants… there is no large scale animal/plant rescue centre… vets are more likely to put an animal down than give it medication to allow it to breed.

“Now were artificialy altering genes, how can you say that a super tomatoe wont permananyly alter existing plant breeds. “

If it is used as the base plant for all other tomato plants then yes it will alter the direction or genetic path taken by the Tomato plant as we know it.

“If you had a dog with a skin problem, would you artificialy alter in genes so it wont have that problem anymore? “

If the skin problem is genetic then why not. What purpose does it serve to have a breed of dog with skin problems? Will the Dog species be something less if none of them had skin diseases? Or any other genetic diseases/problems?

GE will result in scientists getting a better understanding of genes and how they work. I doubt it will ever be an exact science and mistakes will be made.

I have heard a question that goes something like:

“If Humans evolved from apes and monkeys, why are there still apes and monkeys around?”

The answer is of course that we didn’t evolve from apes and/or monkeys.
We evolved from the same animal that apes and monkeys evolved from.
We were a genetic deviation, just as Apes and monkeys were also deviations from the same path. On the face of it our deviation was more successful. GE is merely doing manually what Nature already does.
Sure there will be mistakes, and errors and even some misuse and abuse of this technology but that is the same for any technology.
The wonderful rockets that can take us to the moon or mars or to a space station has cousins that can wipe out the Earth in the form of ICBMs. They may have other relations that could save the Earth from a collision someday.
There are certainly moral issues and there should and will be regulations as to how far GE should go.

“If you wanted to improve something in your child like make him tall or have better eye sight, would you alter the genes so that your child would have these propertys? You dont think that these gene changes are permanant and that the interbreeding of these changes with normal stock are permant? “

In 10 or 100 or 1,000 years it might be possible to choose such attributes for your offspring… why do you see taller children with better eyesight as being bad?

What is normal?
Gene alteration or gene splicing occurs naturally during conception anyway. Children are not clones of their mother their genes constitute a random combination of the genetic attributes of both parents. Dominant genes are passed on, while recessive genes may remain hidden until with one child the normally dominant gene fails and the child has red hair or green eyes… The difference is design vs luck. For many luck will be good enough. When it comes to passing on Altzheimers then they may want luck to not be a factor.
Altzheimers is bad enough but to find that you may have passed it on to your children is a cruel blow that may not in the future have to be.

“there is no barrier to mistakes that natural breeding has to protect from dangerous mistakes. “

Natures barrier to mistakes is death before reproduction to remove the error from the gene pool.
In GE the barrier will be termination of the fetus or destruction of the crop.

“Breeders have said for years that were loosing the genetic diversity nessesary to draw apon if standard breeds we rely on fail. “

Inbreeding is currently a problem for many Domestic and wild animals and plants. GE can create genetic diversity and is a potential solution to this problem. Standard breeds are standard simply because they are the least likely to fail… ie the strongest healthiest, most productive breeds are the sought after “Standard breeds”.

At the time the Dinosaurs roamed the Earth there was no such thing as grass. The Earth survived without it. It was different of course but no single lifeform was or is not expendible.
I am not suggesting widespread extinction is a good thing but GE promises to add to diversity not detract from it.
It is merely a manual human controlled way of doing what nature has been doing since life began.

Imagine the potential… there is some talk here of GE a Moa.
(A Moa is native New Zealand flightless bird that stood over 3m tall.
Or how about resurrecting the giant Haast Eagle that hunted the Moa!!!!!)

Research into GE will most likely lead to the categorising and storing of much more genetic information than is collected now. Such information will be for the purpose of one day perhaps ressurecting species that don’t survive the next few years… animals like White Rhinos and Siberian Tigers and Black Robins and even Kiwis, Tuis, and Kea’s.

Perhaps I am being too positive and perhaps a little naive… (of course the Americans will develop it into a deadly weapon that will kill us all }> ) but on balance I think it will be a good thing… though not perfect and there will be problems along the way but I think we’ll get over them. 🙂

djcross, you think that the market is self reguating? Its regulated by one thing, thats money. Breeders have said for years that were loosing the genetic diversity nessesary to draw apon if standard breeds we rely on fail. …Will the original breed still exist if genetic changes falter and wreak disater to a breed or will those genetic changes have intermixed already to the entire line of breeding stock and make return to nature impossible?

When we talk about a genetically altered super plant or animal at the end of the day they are simply plants or animals with very good genes.
If you place one in the middle of a group of similar plants or animals then they won’t all suddenly change into this super plant or animal. In the case of animals a farmer or breeder has complete control over breeding simply by determining which males get into fields with which females. If the Farmer chooses to only breed using his super bull he doesn’t lose biodiversity… the bull has good genes but the females also have genes as well and the mix will result in the type of calf that is produced. We are not talking about one set of genes for all… this isn’t cloning. The same with plants as well… the super plant will have good disease resistant genes but during pollenation the mix will again be down to nature and although the crop will have improved genes via the new gene set it won’t effect or eliminate every single nonGE modified gene in the pool… biodiversity is maintained.

RE: genetic engineering

I’m afraid that it’s just a matter of big money as usual.
The big companies are claiming that these “new” products will help the poor countries to get more food but this sounds like BS to me since the seeds are more expensive than the traditional ones.

They claim that it’s safe : ok ! How do they know? Have they done all the test? I’m sure they didn’t since the “time to market” is the most important and beacuse those firms are “profit oriented”.

Does anyone have any idea what gonna occur if one of these gentivally modified organism produces some kind of hybrid with an other organism.

Once again the mankind plays with the matches and will have hard time to extinguish the fire !!!!

RE: genetic engineering

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 21-08-02 AT 07:58 PM (GMT)]Garry,your absolutely right about humans becoming weaker due to the absence of natural selection. But why dont you attribute the same to plants and animals? The crops and livestalk we use has been bred for thousands of years for their stength of growth, health, resistance to disease and pestulance. Now were artificialy altering genes, how can you say that a super tomatoe wont permananyly alter existing plant breeds. Thats what the whole contriversy lately is is that genetically altered crops are pollinating nearby natural crops. In europe theyve found that their corn has been intermixed with the GE(genetically engineered) corn. If you had a dog with a skin problem, would you artificialy alter in genes so it wont have that problem anymore? If you wanted to improve something in your child like make him tall or have better eye sight, would you alter the genes so that your child would have these propertys? You dont think that these gene changes are permanant and that the interbreeding of these changes with normal stock are permant? As Ive tried to say, GE gives power to patch in any kind of genes you want into a plant/animal, there is no barrier to mistakes that natural breeding has to protect from dangerous mistakes. djcross, you think that the market is self reguating? Its regulated by one thing, thats money. Breeders have said for years that were loosing the genetic diversity nessesary to draw apon if standard breeds we rely on fail. It took thousands of years to bring these qualitys out. Do you think a breeder can take a mut, and in a few generations create a poodle? All the dog breeds in the world are made from only about 30 genetic mutations. Peóple who raise livestalk have shown theyre willing to do any kind of change at all to improve yields in their animals. Will the original breed still exist if genetic changes falter and wreak disater to a breed or will those genetic changes have intermixed already to the entire line of breeding stock and make return to nature impossible?

RE: genetic engineering

The marketplace is self-regulating and will determine the correct place for genetic engineering. Fruits and vegetables that taste better and don’t spoil easily and elimination of many birth defects are potentially viable in the marketplace. Nay-sayers have been watching too many 1950’s monster movies where Dr. X creates an army of mutant dwarf ninjas to take over the world – they let emotion rule over logic.

RE: genetic engineering

The problem is the pace of evolution is too slow.
Technology has changed us from hunter gatherers to couch potatoes. Our bodies haven’t made that adjustment (genetically speaking) so we have problems like diabetes and heart disease and obesity… simply because energy rich foods are abundantly available and with multiple sources of food supply there are no periods of time that we have to “go without”.

Humans have always altered nature around them for their own needs. (The concept of the noble savage living as one with nature is BS).
Humans that even just 150 years ago would have died young and not reproduced are now living longer lives. Even very weak gene structures survive due to modern medicine.
The problem is that diseases of the aged like Alzheimers etc will increase and those with it in their genes will propagate it so that younger and younger victims will appear.
One answer is barbaric… kill the weak… the other solution is correct the problem… even if it is just for their children.

Regarding altering crops… humans have been selectively breeding plants and animals to their own needs for many thousands of years.
Creating a super tomato does not destroy all other existing tomatoes… it just creates a new breed or type of tomato. Interbreeding it with other types will create further types but as currently farmers seem to manage to produce the type of breed of plant and or animal they want I don’t see how GE will change this… unless a rival farmer sneaks over the fence and injects them with something.

Obviously care must be taken but if it promises new weed and insect resistant fast growing crops then I have no problems with it.