Political Crossfire Forums

flamboyant · Joined: 25 Mar 2006 Posts: 1881

Scientists to create 'frankenbunny' in big research leap
London, Thursday 05.10.06

Scientists are planning to create a "frankenrabbit" by fusing together human cells with a rabbit egg.

It is hoped the "chimeric" embryos, which would be 99.9 per cent human and 0.1 per cent rabbit, could lead to breakthroughs in stem cell research which could one day cure diseases such as Alzheimer's or spinal cord injury.

The embryos will allow scientists to perfect stem cell creation techniques without using human eggs.

"If we learn how to do this with animal eggs, we should be able to have more success with human eggs, and I'd much rather know that if we were going to ask women to donate eggs that we were very likely to get stem cells as a result," said Chris Shaw, at the Institute of Psychiatry.

"We know this is a huge challenge after Dr Hwang in South Korea failed to get stem cells despite having 2,000 human eggs."

Teams in London, Edinburgh and Newcastle are to submit application to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority this month, requesting licences to create embryos that will be 99.9 per cent human and 0.1 per cent rabbit or cow.

The HFEA is encouraging the applications after legal advice. The embryos will be allowed to grow for only 14 days, at which point they will be cells smaller than a pinhead.

source: http://tinyurl.com/z3fk7

----------------

I must admit that after reading the title, I was pretty disappointed to find out that this wasn't some story about scientists trying to duplicate a rabbit like the gigantic rabbit that Jimmy Carter claimed he was attacked by on a boating excursion.

For those people who view human eggs as sacred and are very concerned about science utilizing those eggs to mine stem cells (I may not agree with them, but I can respect their feelings) for these people, this may remove the main obstacle in their support of stem cell research. Of course, for every person whom removing the human eggs would be viewed as a positive, there's probably another person for whom the whole concept of science mixing and matching cells from different species is just as troublesome.

What are your concerns, if any, about the different possible paths to stem cell creation?

The Comrade · Joined: 16 Jul 2006 Posts: 12039 Location: Zagreb

once we start making chimeras it's time to burn this planet.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

IF you'd ever wondered about where the next super virus will come from that will wipe out all life on this planet? It's f***ing with stuff like this... Nature is very balanced and things are created for a reason... this is a perversion plain and simple. These scientists should be drawn and quartered.

ieatfood · Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 6289

Rankor and Pissing wrote: IF you'd ever wondered about where the next super virus will come from that will wipe out all life on this planet? It's f***ing with stuff like this... Nature is very balanced and things are created for a reason... this is a perversion plain and simple. These scientists should be drawn and quartered.

please explain how this will lead to a supervirus.
do you know anything about science?
Or are you just making this stuff up based on what you have heard from the peanut gallery?

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

Ok... no I'm not a scientist, nor do I have to be one to:
a. have an opinion
b. state that opinion
c. base that opinion on published information

As you may or may not know - viruses are built upon genetics the same as all other variable life forms. By creating a new life form genetically, which did not exist before, it introduces new virology possibilities into the enviornment that never existed. A normal virus may act predictably where scientists and virologists can estimate the lifecycle and evolution of a virus, depending upon the hosts it inhabits.

Using plain logic, one may then assume a normal and predictable virus introduced into a biological system that has never existed before could provide results that never existed before at the DNA / RNA level. That predictability of the virus and any changes also may change.

Factually, the Journal of Virology has studied normal virus activity in animals for quite some time now and the Epidemiology of these findings over time have shown interesting results.

Make this stuff up? Hardly...

http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/full/77/17/9578

Peanut gallery? You need to read more...

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/isisnews/i-sisnews9-10.php

Imagine that... and I didn't even watch an old episode of star trek or anything.

ieatfood · Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 6289

Rankor and Pissing wrote: Ok... no I'm not a scientist, nor do I have to be one to:
a. have an opinion
b. state that opinion
c. base that opinion on published information

As you may or may not know - viruses are built upon genetics the same as all other variable life forms. By creating a new life form genetically, which did not exist before, it introduces new virology possibilities into the enviornment that never existed. A normal virus may act predictably where scientists and virologists can estimate the lifecycle and evolution of a virus, depending upon the hosts it inhabits.

Using plain logic, one may then assume a normal and predictable virus introduced into a biological system that has never existed before could provide results that never existed before at the DNA / RNA level. That predictability of the virus and any changes also may change.

Factually, the Journal of Virology has studied normal virus activity in animals for quite some time now and the Epidemiology of these findings over time have shown interesting results.

Make this stuff up? Hardly...

http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/full/77/17/9578

Peanut gallery? You need to read more...

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/isisnews/i-sisnews9-10.php

Imagine that... and I didn't even watch an old episode of star trek or anything.

clearly you understand very little about the science
needless to say, the links that you posted do not back your claims

taking rabbit embryos and adding human DNA into them does not have anything to do with viruses. You are making stuff up by using literature that you don't understand.

This is why decisions concerning science should be left to scientists, not lay people. You wouldn't try to fly an airplane or land a shuttle on the moon? Why are you trying to tell scientists what is and is not safe? You are not qualified to do any of these things.

perdidochas · Joined: 06 Mar 2006 Posts: 15372 Location: Florida

flamboyant wrote: Scientists to create 'frankenbunny' in big research leap
London, Thursday 05.10.06

Scientists are planning to create a "frankenrabbit" by fusing together human cells with a rabbit egg.

It is hoped the "chimeric" embryos, which would be 99.9 per cent human and 0.1 per cent rabbit, could lead to breakthroughs in stem cell research which could one day cure diseases such as Alzheimer's or spinal cord injury.

The embryos will allow scientists to perfect stem cell creation techniques without using human eggs.

"If we learn how to do this with animal eggs, we should be able to have more success with human eggs, and I'd much rather know that if we were going to ask women to donate eggs that we were very likely to get stem cells as a result," said Chris Shaw, at the Institute of Psychiatry.

The Institute of Psychiatry involved in genetic experiments? Sounds like this is possibly a fake story (or one that the reporter didnt' get all of his facts straight on).

flamboyant wrote: "We know this is a huge challenge after Dr Hwang in South Korea failed to get stem cells despite having 2,000 human eggs."

Teams in London, Edinburgh and Newcastle are to submit application to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority this month, requesting licences to create embryos that will be 99.9 per cent human and 0.1 per cent rabbit or cow.

The HFEA is encouraging the applications after legal advice. The embryos will be allowed to grow for only 14 days, at which point they will be cells smaller than a pinhead.

source: http://tinyurl.com/z3fk7

----------------

I must admit that after reading the title, I was pretty disappointed to find out that this wasn't some story about scientists trying to duplicate a rabbit like the gigantic rabbit that Jimmy Carter claimed he was attacked by on a boating excursion.

For those people who view human eggs as sacred and are very concerned about science utilizing those eggs to mine stem cells (I may not agree with them, but I can respect their feelings) for these people, this may remove the main obstacle in their support of stem cell research. Of course, for every person whom removing the human eggs would be viewed as a positive, there's probably another person for whom the whole concept of science mixing and matching cells from different species is just as troublesome.

What are your concerns, if any, about the different possible paths to stem cell creation?

This has to be approached cautiously, as does any kind of genetic engineering. The possible unintended consequences could be horrendous.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

ieatfood wrote: Rankor and Pissing wrote: Ok... no I'm not a scientist, nor do I have to be one to:
a. have an opinion
b. state that opinion
c. base that opinion on published information

As you may or may not know - viruses are built upon genetics the same as all other variable life forms. By creating a new life form genetically, which did not exist before, it introduces new virology possibilities into the enviornment that never existed. A normal virus may act predictably where scientists and virologists can estimate the lifecycle and evolution of a virus, depending upon the hosts it inhabits.

Using plain logic, one may then assume a normal and predictable virus introduced into a biological system that has never existed before could provide results that never existed before at the DNA / RNA level. That predictability of the virus and any changes also may change.

Factually, the Journal of Virology has studied normal virus activity in animals for quite some time now and the Epidemiology of these findings over time have shown interesting results.

Make this stuff up? Hardly...

http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/full/77/17/9578

Peanut gallery? You need to read more...

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/isisnews/i-sisnews9-10.php

Imagine that... and I didn't even watch an old episode of star trek or anything.

clearly you understand very little about the science
needless to say, the links that you posted do not back your claims

taking rabbit embryos and adding human DNA into them does not have anything to do with viruses. You are making stuff up by using literature that you don't understand.

This is why decisions concerning science should be left to scientists, not lay people. You wouldn't try to fly an airplane or land a shuttle on the moon? Why are you trying to tell scientists what is and is not safe? You are not qualified to do any of these things.

Well, I'll claim the same about you... you clearly do not understand biological science, you obviously did not understand the documentation (or probably read it) and know about as much about science as politics... which isn't much.

I've not only proved my point, i've supported it. Genetic splicing is nothing to mess around with. What PhD do you have in Biology then? What is exactly incorrect about the links that I provided?

Point by point or this is simply another ad hominem attack about a subject you obviously have never read about...

See, how it works is, I state my claim and you provide rebuttal documentation. Just because YOU SAY SO, isn't really a debate.

Call me when you get that degree huh? :lol:

J. Reiner · Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 39

R&P, the only way a Super Virus could be created from this is if a preexisting Rabbit virus used this as a platform to leap from Rabbits to humans.

Viruses are merely nucleic acid wrapped in a protein. Scientists would be hard pressed to accidentally create a
virus in the conditions necessary to perform this splicing in the first place. Even if they do it will be performed in a clean room, sealed from the world, and would be destroyed as soon as discovered.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

Here's a little more ieatfood for you not to read:

Ethan R. Signer* Dept. of Biology, MIT Retired.

Gene splicing is fundamentally different from other forms of genetic breeding used in the past. Breeding programs work on existing arrays of genetic variability in a species, isolating specific genetic traits through selective breeding. Scientists using gene splicing can essentially "stack" the deck or even produce an entirely new deck of genetic "cards."

But this powerful ability to change the genetic deck of cards also raises substantial scientific concerns that some "sleight-of-hand" would produce dangerous consequences. Ethan Signer said, "Those who are powerful in society will do the shuffling; their genes will be shuffled in one direction, while the genes of the rest of us will get shuffled in another." Also there is the concern that a reshuffled deck of genes might create an Andromeda strain similar to the one envisioned by Michael Crichton is his book by the same title. A microorganism might inadvertently be given the genetic structure for some pathogen for which there is no antidote or vaccine.

In the early days of this research, scientists called for a moratorium until the risks of this new technology could be assessed. Even after the National Institute of Health issued guidelines, public fear was considerable. When Harvard University planned to construct a genetic facility for gene splicing, the mayor of Cambridge, Massachusetts, expressed his concern that "something could crawl out of the laboratory, such as a Frankenstein."

The potential benefits of gene splicing are significant. First, the technology can be used to produce medically important substances. The list of these substances is quite large and would include insulin, interferon, and human growth hormone. Gene splicing also has great application in the field of immunology. In order to protect organisms from viral disease, doctors must inject a killed or attenuated virus. Scientists can use the technology to disable a toxin gene, thus yielding a viral substance that triggers the generation of antibodies without the possibility of producing the disease.

Here's more that shows how little I know about the subject matter:

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?632

and More...

http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/GEessays/xenotransplantrisk.html

I've got some crow here and I'm thinking your a little hungy ieatfood... perhaps a change in name is appropriate to maybe.... ieatcrow? :lol:

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

J. Reiner wrote: R&P, the only way a Super Virus could be created from this is if a preexisting Rabbit virus used this as a platform to leap from Rabbits to humans.

Viruses are merely nucleic acid wrapped in a protein. Scientists would be hard pressed to accidentally create a
virus in the conditions necessary to perform this splicing in the first place. Even if they do it will be performed in a clean room, sealed from the world, and would be destroyed as soon as discovered.

I'd suggest reviewing the two links I provided. By creating an entirely new organism that is genetically altered with human DNA, it's not out of the realm of possibility that a virus could be created that already could be harmful to humans - if human DNA is used with rabbits, why would the virus need to jump since it already has the blueprint of the DNA within the new organism itself.

Wolverine · Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 10837 Location: Podunk, Colorado

The thought of the outcome of a human bunny rabit makes me giggle. :lol:

But seriously, this is a really retarded thing to screw around with.

ieatfood · Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 6289

Rankor and Pissing wrote: Here's a little more ieatfood for you not to read:

Ethan R. Signer* Dept. of Biology, MIT Retired.

Gene splicing is fundamentally different from other forms of genetic breeding used in the past. Breeding programs work on existing arrays of genetic variability in a species, isolating specific genetic traits through selective breeding. Scientists using gene splicing can essentially "stack" the deck or even produce an entirely new deck of genetic "cards."

But this powerful ability to change the genetic deck of cards also raises substantial scientific concerns that some "sleight-of-hand" would produce dangerous consequences. Ethan Signer said, "Those who are powerful in society will do the shuffling; their genes will be shuffled in one direction, while the genes of the rest of us will get shuffled in another." Also there is the concern that a reshuffled deck of genes might create an Andromeda strain similar to the one envisioned by Michael Crichton is his book by the same title. A microorganism might inadvertently be given the genetic structure for some pathogen for which there is no antidote or vaccine.

In the early days of this research, scientists called for a moratorium until the risks of this new technology could be assessed. Even after the National Institute of Health issued guidelines, public fear was considerable. When Harvard University planned to construct a genetic facility for gene splicing, the mayor of Cambridge, Massachusetts, expressed his concern that "something could crawl out of the laboratory, such as a Frankenstein."

The potential benefits of gene splicing are significant. First, the technology can be used to produce medically important substances. The list of these substances is quite large and would include insulin, interferon, and human growth hormone. Gene splicing also has great application in the field of immunology. In order to protect organisms from viral disease, doctors must inject a killed or attenuated virus. Scientists can use the technology to disable a toxin gene, thus yielding a viral substance that triggers the generation of antibodies without the possibility of producing the disease.

Here's more that shows how little I know about the subject matter:

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?632

and More...

http://online.sfsu.edu/%7Erone/GEessays/xenotransplantrisk.html

I've got some crow here and I'm thinking your a little hungy ieatfood... perhaps a change in name is appropriate to maybe.... ieatcrow? :lol:

you have swagger in your tone but you know little

the paragraph you cited is completely irrelevant to the project of replacing the nucleus of a rabbit ovum with human dna

it is talking about recombination of dna within human pathogens. That can be dangerous and having worked in labs that do exactly this, I sometimes wonder the kinds of dangers that the bugs I am creating pose. However, we are not talking about that kind of research. SO i don't see what your point is.

the article you linked to talks about agricultural bioengineering, which is entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand. THe dangers posed there, such as the loss of species diversity are not applicable here.

the second article talks about xenotransplantation--again, entirely irrelevant. The concern there is with viral recombination. That is not applicable here.

you really are displaying how little you know by posting these links.

you heard the term "genetic engineering" and thought that if you post any article that mentioned "genetic engineering", that it would apply. You are trying to present evidence by word association. Clearly, you have no idea what is going on.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

ieatfood wrote:
you have swagger in your tone but you know little

the paragraph you cited is completely irrelevant to the project of replacing the nucleus of a rabbit ovum with human dna

The paragraph I stated (as well as the links) provided concern by an MIT PhD Biology Professor which provides support for my premise... which was:

Rankor and Pissing wrote: IF you'd ever wondered about where the next super virus will come from that will wipe out all life on this planet?

My concern has NOTHING to do with the rabbit ovum and human dna, and EVERYTHING to do with possible changes in to virii due such an experiment, and the potential outbreak of such virii. As you can see, I never commented on the original post. You're not even understanding what my position is, yet your dismissing it. :roll:

ieatfood wrote: the article you linked to talks about agricultural bioengineering, which is entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand. THe dangers posed there, such as the loss of species diversity are not applicable here. It has everything to do with MY premise, which is stated above.

ieatfood wrote: you really are displaying how little you know by posting these links. I'm not PhD in Biology, however, I am well read. The amount of concern from Scientists who are genetically splicing and mixing genetic code as well as replacing DNA sequences could have disasterous effects, both in agricultural / plant life as well as things such as Rabbits & Human DNA. You've shown nothing to prove otherwise.

ieatfood wrote: you heard the term "genetic engineering" and thought that if you post any article that mentioned "genetic engineering", that it would apply. You are trying to present evidence by word association. Clearly, you have no idea what is going on.

My premise stands that this is inherently dangerous, and could cause a pathogen outbreak of an unknown and uncontrollable virus.

You've provided none of your qualifications - nor have you provided one ounce of rebutal evidence - just your say so. Why should I believe you? Without either you bringing some experience, education, evidence or logic to the discussion, the only thing we're left is listening to your criticism of my findings... so I'll put on the line... I'll admit I'm not only incorrect, but I'll apologize publically if you can convincingly refute and prove my concerns incorrect. I'll even start a new thread called "I was wrong - ieatfood was right" and link back to here.

I've not only provided plant biology evidence that genetic changes and replacement of genetic material in experiments can cause problems, but also animal experimentation - as well, a bit of PhD power from an MIT professor of Biology.

I'm calling you out... show me what you got or zip it.

micfranklin

flamboyant wrote: Scientists to create 'frankenbunny' in big research leap
London, Thursday 05.10.06

Scientists are planning to create a "frankenrabbit" by fusing together human cells with a rabbit egg.

It is hoped the "chimeric" embryos, which would be 99.9 per cent human and 0.1 per cent rabbit, could lead to breakthroughs in stem cell research which could one day cure diseases such as Alzheimer's or spinal cord injury.

The embryos will allow scientists to perfect stem cell creation techniques without using human eggs.

"If we learn how to do this with animal eggs, we should be able to have more success with human eggs, and I'd much rather know that if we were going to ask women to donate eggs that we were very likely to get stem cells as a result," said Chris Shaw, at the Institute of Psychiatry.

"We know this is a huge challenge after Dr Hwang in South Korea failed to get stem cells despite having 2,000 human eggs."

Teams in London, Edinburgh and Newcastle are to submit application to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority this month, requesting licences to create embryos that will be 99.9 per cent human and 0.1 per cent rabbit or cow.

The HFEA is encouraging the applications after legal advice. The embryos will be allowed to grow for only 14 days, at which point they will be cells smaller than a pinhead.

source: http://tinyurl.com/z3fk7

----------------

I must admit that after reading the title, I was pretty disappointed to find out that this wasn't some story about scientists trying to duplicate a rabbit like the gigantic rabbit that Jimmy Carter claimed he was attacked by on a boating excursion.

For those people who view human eggs as sacred and are very concerned about science utilizing those eggs to mine stem cells (I may not agree with them, but I can respect their feelings) for these people, this may remove the main obstacle in their support of stem cell research. Of course, for every person whom removing the human eggs would be viewed as a positive, there's probably another person for whom the whole concept of science mixing and matching cells from different species is just as troublesome.

What are your concerns, if any, about the different possible paths to stem cell creation?

Hybridize a human and a rabbit? So then we'd have people who can't run or walk, just hop.

ieatfood · Joined: 28 Mar 2005 Posts: 6289

Rankor and Pissing wrote: ieatfood wrote:
you have swagger in your tone but you know little

the paragraph you cited is completely irrelevant to the project of replacing the nucleus of a rabbit ovum with human dna

The paragraph I stated (as well as the links) provided concern by an MIT PhD Biology Professor which provides support for my premise... which was:

Rankor and Pissing wrote: IF you'd ever wondered about where the next super virus will come from that will wipe out all life on this planet?

My concern has NOTHING to do with the rabbit ovum and human dna, and EVERYTHING to do with possible changes in to virii due such an experiment, and the potential outbreak of such virii. As you can see, I never commented on the original post. You're not even understanding what my position is, yet your dismissing it. :roll:

ieatfood wrote: the article you linked to talks about agricultural bioengineering, which is entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand. THe dangers posed there, such as the loss of species diversity are not applicable here. It has everything to do with MY premise, which is stated above.

ieatfood wrote: you really are displaying how little you know by posting these links. I'm not PhD in Biology, however, I am well read. The amount of concern from Scientists who are genetically splicing and mixing genetic code as well as replacing DNA sequences could have disasterous effects, both in agricultural / plant life as well as things such as Rabbits & Human DNA. You've shown nothing to prove otherwise.

ieatfood wrote: you heard the term "genetic engineering" and thought that if you post any article that mentioned "genetic engineering", that it would apply. You are trying to present evidence by word association. Clearly, you have no idea what is going on.

My premise stands that this is inherently dangerous, and could cause a pathogen outbreak of an unknown and uncontrollable virus.

You've provided none of your qualifications - nor have you provided one ounce of rebutal evidence - just your say so. Why should I believe you? Without either you bringing some experience, education, evidence or logic to the discussion, the only thing we're left is listening to your criticism of my findings... so I'll put on the line... I'll admit I'm not only incorrect, but I'll apologize publically if you can convincingly refute and prove my concerns incorrect. I'll even start a new thread called "I was wrong - ieatfood was right" and link back to here.

I've not only provided plant biology evidence that genetic changes and replacement of genetic material in experiments can cause problems, but also animal experimentation - as well, a bit of PhD power from an MIT professor of Biology.

I'm calling you out... show me what you got or zip it.

you still don't get it???

putting human DNA into a rabbit cell is NOT the same as agricultural genetic splicing or working with recombinant viruses

it's great that you are "well read." But the articles you cite do not relate to the topic at hand and certainly do not back up your claims. If you actually understood the arguments that the authors of those articles are making, you would see why.

saying that "genetic experiments" can cause deadly viruses is pretty much the crux of your argument. Your understanding of the topic goes no further than this. Do you have any suggestion of exactly how a virus might result from the rabbit egg experiment? Or is your argument simply that any time you do experiments with genes, deadly viruses will just magically pop up because you you say so?

you have not provided one shred of evidence for your claims. There is really nothing to refute.

people who don't understand science should stay away from making judgements that involve science. This exchange has been a very good example of this.

Rankor and Pissing · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 9449

It's actually you who still don't get it... only more criticism and no link, no facts, no evidence provided by you... all I have is your say so.

That's what I call weak.

Sorry - moving on from this thread since I was hoping at least my challenge would provide some sort of incentive... but it is you, sir, who knows nothing about the subject matter, who cannot support his position... I'll make sure not to bother attempting a debate with you in the future since you cannot debate!

Numb · Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 273

A frankenbunny huh? :? I bet these guys are just trying to play God and cover it up with what they hope will come of it.

perdidochas · Joined: 06 Mar 2006 Posts: 15372 Location: Florida

ieatfood wrote:
putting human DNA into a rabbit cell is NOT the same as agricultural genetic splicing or working with recombinant viruses

How is it any different than agricultural genetic splicing? Please explain how putting a piece of human DNA in a rabbit is any different than putting a daffodile gene into rice, to produce a rice that makes beta-carotene.

ieatfood wrote:
people who don't understand science should stay away from making judgements that involve science. This exchange has been a very good example of this.

I do understand science--i.e. I have a B.S. in Biology and a Master's in Marine biology. I agree we need to be very cautious with this technology. The unintended consequences could be enormous.

MplsBison · Joined: 13 Dec 2005 Posts: 3237

Rankor and Pissing wrote: IF you'd ever wondered about where the next super virus will come from that will wipe out all life on this planet? It's f***ing with stuff like this... Nature is very balanced and things are created for a reason... this is a perversion plain and simple. These scientists should be drawn and quartered.

Electric heat?! Inside the home?!

NO, NO, NO!!

I won't allow such madness!!

It'll be wood burning ovens or it will be nothing sir!

How dare you try to change the way things have been!

How dare you!

Lets try and keep ethics out of science.