"There are lots of reasons gene splicing would not work - Being different creatures involves having different genes, and the effects of intermixing them would be unsafe and unpredictable at best." Is that any better for you?
I don't know. The whole point of genetic engineering (and genetics in general) is to understand how changes to the genome propagate up to macroscopic changes in phenotype (or biochemistry). Currently we have a pretty good handle on what genes do what and we're starting to get a better idea of how different genes interact. We can look at a gene from a specific animal and say exactly what protein its sequence expresses. The tricky part is figuring out how that gene is regulated and how it interacts with other genes. There's nothing special about genes from other animals that makes them somehow incompatible (and I mean this in the broadest sense; you can probably easily find genes which could inhibit the expression of other genes if inserted in the right place and really screw some **** up) with genes from other animals.
Why confine a topic about genetics to just gene splicing?
That's what I figured. Also gene splicing unfortunately tends to be the colloquial term for any kind of direct genetic modification (even if that "direct" modification is done by an engineered virus; that's how we deliver gene therapies usually). The other unfortunate thing is the stigma attached to the term thanks to Hollywood's ****-tatstic handling of science in film, but that's another topic.
When it becomes available to the public
Surgery is available to the public but it still requires a qualified doctor to perform it. You'll never see a gene therapy home kit. Its availability to the public will be purely through licensed and qualified medical professionals. Howell Jerkwad III won't likely have access on a whim.
If you're dealing with a largely unexplored and unstable science
Except that it's extremely unethical to do that, which is why it isn't done. Genetic engineering isn't nearly so unexplored and unstable as some like to make it out. Do we have a lot to learn? Yes. Are we ready for large scale deployment of gene therapies? No. Will we make it safe? Eventually. Medicine (and genetics) is not a trial-and-error science. We derive these gene therapies based on our understanding of how the genome works. The better our understanding gets, the safer and more precise these therapies will be.
even though it would painfully divide humans
No more painful than any of the other social divides that exist (economic, religious, cultural, etc.). Our species has had these divides since the dawn of civilization, I very much doubt that this will open up a can of worms that we haven't already seen countless times.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
I don't know. The whole point of genetic engineering (and genetics in general) is to understand how changes to the genome propagate up to macroscopic changes in phenotype (or biochemistry). Currently we have a pretty good handle on what genes do what and we're starting to get a better idea of how different genes interact. We can look at a gene from a specific animal and say exactly what protein its sequence expresses. The tricky part is figuring out how that gene is regulated and how it interacts with other genes. There's nothing special about genes from other animals that makes them somehow incompatible (and I mean this in the broadest sense; you can probably easily find genes which could inhibit the expression of other genes if inserted in the right place and really screw some **** up) with genes from other animals.
My standing on the topic is that the point of genetic engineering would be not only to understand the science of how genes work and what they change, but to find ways to practically apply it in society. Does that change anything? ... I don't even know.
Quote from Yourself »
Surgery is available to the public but it still requires a qualified doctor to perform it. You'll never see a gene therapy home kit. Its availability to the public will be purely through licensed and qualified medical professionals. Howell Jerkwad III won't likely have access on a whim.
We say that now, but maybe humanity will wise up to the point where you could find a "gene therapy home kit." It's certainly a radical idea from the modern standpoint, but once we're at a stage in science where we can reliably alter human genes... there's no telling what it'll be like. I suppose that's just my guess on how things could turn out.
Quote from Yourself »
Except that it's extremely unethical to do that, which is why it isn't done. Genetic engineering isn't nearly so unexplored and unstable as some like to make it out. Do we have a lot to learn? Yes. Are we ready for large scale deployment of gene therapies? No. Will we make it safe? Eventually. Medicine (and genetics) is not a trial-and-error science. We derive these gene therapies based on our understanding of how the genome works. The better our understanding gets, the safer and more precise these therapies will be.
It isn't unethical to delve further into science. If ethics had always prevented us from progressing in any given field of knowledge, where would we be? The concept of altering genes would be controversial from the start, but I don't think it would ever prevent us from learning more about it or even putting it to practical use.
Quote from Yourself »
No more painful than any of the other social divides that exist (economic, religious, cultural, etc.). Our species has had these divides since the dawn of civilization, I very much doubt that this will open up a can of worms that we haven't already seen countless times.
I think this case would be worse than any humanity has seen before, because (again, from what I know about eugenics) this division would be trying to say that one race is clearly better than all others in every way, and having science to support the claim! I'm sure you'd be pretty worried, angry, or at least uncertain if your race suddenly became "the ugly half" of human society because of the rise of a new super race.
I love it when other people generally know what they're talking about when they argue.
It's not the science, it's the way it's performed. Ethical issues are what stop us from indiscriminately experimenting on humans. The kind of certainty needed behind a treatment before it can get approved for human testing is incredibly high. If you're going to test on humans, you better be damn well sure you're not going to kill anyone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Why are we voting on whether genetic modification is possible when we already do it? Did the poll creator not read the link I posted about gene therapies curing blindness?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Why are we voting on whether genetic modification is possible when we already do it? Did the poll creator not read the link I posted about gene therapies curing blindness?
This. Genetic engineering and modification is already a real field of science and engineering. Just ask Drew Endy or Craig Venter if you believe otherwise.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The inquisitors were torturing Harry.
First, Ignatius used the rock.
Then Billy asked Harry if he wanted to read his BDSM blog. Harry was so surprised that his pants flew right off. He was wearing women's underpants. The inquisitors were wearing them, too.
Why are we voting on whether genetic modification is possible when we already do it? Did the poll creator not read the link I posted about gene therapies curing blindness?
I made the poll at the start of the thread, not after you posted that link. The poll isnt going down any time soon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am NOT going to see friend requests, so stop sending them.
That's... kinda silly. Natural plants have been fine-tuned by natural selection for billions of years, I doubt some genetically modified crop could really out-compete natural plants to that extent.
EDIT: Especially considering that we'd be eating all of it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The inquisitors were torturing Harry.
First, Ignatius used the rock.
Then Billy asked Harry if he wanted to read his BDSM blog. Harry was so surprised that his pants flew right off. He was wearing women's underpants. The inquisitors were wearing them, too.
already found a weed on his farmland, which apparently copied the gene and he couldn't remove it.
Weeds can't copy genes from plants of different species except by pure chance. It doesn't matter that the gene exists in another plant, it can't drift over into the genome of a different species.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Why cant we dive more into gene "engineering"? Especially in the Medical field, where it would flourish.
Think about this: bacteria are immune to diseases. What does this mean to humans? The most important medical procedure in human history. Now, don't think that sooner or later a disease will bypass our immune system; We will more than likely still have a medical field, because let's face it It's near impossible to change almost 7 billion people's DNA. I am one of the people who believes in extraterrestrial intelligence, And if there is another civilization out there that is farther ahead than ourselves, they without a doubt have mutated themselves. Of course, they also might not have the same morals as us, so the life of the same specie might not matter as much to them, but should that stop us?
Now, don't think that sooner or later a disease will bypass our immune system
They already exist. HIV is a perfect example.
Sorry, I actually mistyped that; I meant to say that it (HIV) wont be able to pass our immune system when we have a similar system to bacteria. I skim checked it, so that probably why I made that error.
already found a weed on his farmland, which apparently copied the gene and he couldn't remove it.
Weeds can't copy genes from plants of different species except by pure chance. It doesn't matter that the gene exists in another plant, it can't drift over into the genome of a different species.
Then Billy asked Harry if he wanted to read his BDSM blog. Harry was so surprised that his pants flew right off. He was wearing women's underpants. The inquisitors were wearing them, too.
already found a weed on his farmland, which apparently copied the gene and he couldn't remove it.
Weeds can't copy genes from plants of different species except by pure chance. It doesn't matter that the gene exists in another plant, it can't drift over into the genome of a different species.
I'd heard of HGT before, but I didn't think it had been observed in plant-plant interactions. In any case it's a rare occurrence and has only been observed to occur between a host plant and a parasitic companion plant. I haven't read the paper, so I don't know the mechanism by which the HGT occurs, but I imagine it's highly dependent on the parasite actually absorbing material from the host rather than just being in close proximity (as weeds are).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
I don't know. The whole point of genetic engineering (and genetics in general) is to understand how changes to the genome propagate up to macroscopic changes in phenotype (or biochemistry). Currently we have a pretty good handle on what genes do what and we're starting to get a better idea of how different genes interact. We can look at a gene from a specific animal and say exactly what protein its sequence expresses. The tricky part is figuring out how that gene is regulated and how it interacts with other genes. There's nothing special about genes from other animals that makes them somehow incompatible (and I mean this in the broadest sense; you can probably easily find genes which could inhibit the expression of other genes if inserted in the right place and really screw some **** up) with genes from other animals.
That's what I figured. Also gene splicing unfortunately tends to be the colloquial term for any kind of direct genetic modification (even if that "direct" modification is done by an engineered virus; that's how we deliver gene therapies usually). The other unfortunate thing is the stigma attached to the term thanks to Hollywood's ****-tatstic handling of science in film, but that's another topic.
Surgery is available to the public but it still requires a qualified doctor to perform it. You'll never see a gene therapy home kit. Its availability to the public will be purely through licensed and qualified medical professionals. Howell Jerkwad III won't likely have access on a whim.
Except that it's extremely unethical to do that, which is why it isn't done. Genetic engineering isn't nearly so unexplored and unstable as some like to make it out. Do we have a lot to learn? Yes. Are we ready for large scale deployment of gene therapies? No. Will we make it safe? Eventually. Medicine (and genetics) is not a trial-and-error science. We derive these gene therapies based on our understanding of how the genome works. The better our understanding gets, the safer and more precise these therapies will be.
No more painful than any of the other social divides that exist (economic, religious, cultural, etc.). Our species has had these divides since the dawn of civilization, I very much doubt that this will open up a can of worms that we haven't already seen countless times.
We say that now, but maybe humanity will wise up to the point where you could find a "gene therapy home kit." It's certainly a radical idea from the modern standpoint, but once we're at a stage in science where we can reliably alter human genes... there's no telling what it'll be like. I suppose that's just my guess on how things could turn out.
It isn't unethical to delve further into science. If ethics had always prevented us from progressing in any given field of knowledge, where would we be? The concept of altering genes would be controversial from the start, but I don't think it would ever prevent us from learning more about it or even putting it to practical use.
I think this case would be worse than any humanity has seen before, because (again, from what I know about eugenics) this division would be trying to say that one race is clearly better than all others in every way, and having science to support the claim! I'm sure you'd be pretty worried, angry, or at least uncertain if your race suddenly became "the ugly half" of human society because of the rise of a new super race.
I love it when other people generally know what they're talking about when they argue.
It's not the science, it's the way it's performed. Ethical issues are what stop us from indiscriminately experimenting on humans. The kind of certainty needed behind a treatment before it can get approved for human testing is incredibly high. If you're going to test on humans, you better be damn well sure you're not going to kill anyone.
I think we've covered everything.
This. Genetic engineering and modification is already a real field of science and engineering. Just ask Drew Endy or Craig Venter if you believe otherwise.
First, Ignatius used the rock.
Then Billy asked Harry if he wanted to read his BDSM blog. Harry was so surprised that his pants flew right off. He was wearing women's underpants. The inquisitors were wearing them, too.
They realized that they were all men of the lord.
- 30 Hs
I made the poll at the start of the thread, not after you posted that link. The poll isnt going down any time soon.
We cant stay on one planet forever ya know!
facepalm of the month- dra6o0n
That's what you think. We just havent DELVED DEEP AND GREEDILY yet.
Once we make our mountainhomes
Our race will be perfect.
BACK ON TOPIC NOW
That's... kinda silly. Natural plants have been fine-tuned by natural selection for billions of years, I doubt some genetically modified crop could really out-compete natural plants to that extent.
EDIT: Especially considering that we'd be eating all of it.
First, Ignatius used the rock.
Then Billy asked Harry if he wanted to read his BDSM blog. Harry was so surprised that his pants flew right off. He was wearing women's underpants. The inquisitors were wearing them, too.
They realized that they were all men of the lord.
- 30 Hs
Weeds can't copy genes from plants of different species except by pure chance. It doesn't matter that the gene exists in another plant, it can't drift over into the genome of a different species.
Think about this: bacteria are immune to diseases. What does this mean to humans? The most important medical procedure in human history. Now, don't think that sooner or later a disease will bypass our immune system; We will more than likely still have a medical field, because let's face it It's near impossible to change almost 7 billion people's DNA. I am one of the people who believes in extraterrestrial intelligence, And if there is another civilization out there that is farther ahead than ourselves, they without a doubt have mutated themselves. Of course, they also might not have the same morals as us, so the life of the same specie might not matter as much to them, but should that stop us?
I hope to have some good responses to my post.
They already exist. HIV is a perfect example.
Sorry, I actually mistyped that; I meant to say that it (HIV) wont be able to pass our immune system when we have a similar system to bacteria. I skim checked it, so that probably why I made that error.
Actually...
First, Ignatius used the rock.
Then Billy asked Harry if he wanted to read his BDSM blog. Harry was so surprised that his pants flew right off. He was wearing women's underpants. The inquisitors were wearing them, too.
They realized that they were all men of the lord.
- 30 Hs
I'd heard of HGT before, but I didn't think it had been observed in plant-plant interactions. In any case it's a rare occurrence and has only been observed to occur between a host plant and a parasitic companion plant. I haven't read the paper, so I don't know the mechanism by which the HGT occurs, but I imagine it's highly dependent on the parasite actually absorbing material from the host rather than just being in close proximity (as weeds are).
It already is possible. We already use it as a medical treatment for certain kinds of blindness.