Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Genetically Engineered "Smart" Mice

Posted by Hemos on from the newer-better-faster dept.

Lucius Lucanius writes "A smart gene that helps mice learn faster has been discovered. This follows recent discoveries about neuron generation in monkeys and the creation of doogie the smart mouse. Excitement abounds in the "smart pet" industry, but will it ever be applied to humans?"

6 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Time to buy flowers ..... by taniwha · · Score: 5

    for Algernon ...

  2. Smart humans. by wowbagger · · Score: 4

    Personally, I can't wait. Maybe we can get smart humans, instead of the dumb variety we have now. (want proof? Read at 0).

    --
    www.eFax.com are spammers
  3. from the hall of Duh. by deander2 · · Score: 5

    Come on guys, do we really NEED smarter mice? What happens when they "learn" what a mouse trap is? What happens when they "learn" to open the fridge? Come on, THINK before you act people!

    :-)

    --
    http://kered.org
  4. Human Evolution by DranoK · · Score: 4

    Please, I beg of you, do not moderate this down or reply in flame because you disagree! I'm only trying to make a point (that you may or not believe in) for the sake of discussion.

    Evolution has held before a process of survival of the fittest. OK. This is very over-simplified, but let's just leave it at that. We can assume that there are minor differences in every creature, and those differences which prove beneficial tend to be passed on, thus evolving the species. I know we now know that there are conditions that can alter the rate of evolution, but again, for the sake of discussion, let's keep it simple.

    The problem that I've always seen is that humans have stopped evolving. At least according to this scheme. Sure, we keep attaining more knowlege, but for the most part the biological (and this includes mental) aspect of humanity is not changing (at least in no way that is caused by the strictest sense of evolution). This is because we no longer abide by "survival of the fittest".

    Sure, just because someone is smarter / stronger / etc than most gives him/her a huge advantage in life, but doesn't necessarily affect the outcome of survival. With some exceptions, no longer do the fittest survive only, but all do. This means that weak genes are just as likely to be passed along as strong ones. Evolution, for the most part, no longer applies.

    Have we reached the stage where we need to evolve ourselves? Where we are in control of evolution? It's a scary thought. Granted, this article only hints of what may be possible in the future, but it's a concept that is relatively new and frighteningly, very feasable. The ability to modify genes in an unborn embryo.

    Isn't this controlling the specie's evolution? No matter how many laws the nation or world passes, if the technology exists it will be used. There is not, however, any way to stop the progress.

    Personally, I don't think the question is if we ever are able to control our own evolution, how to we stop it, but, when we are able to control our own evolution, how will we mold it?

    Something to think about.

    Peace,
    DranoK


    That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange eons even death may die.

    --

    Shh! Nobody knows I'm gay!
  5. Smarter Mice by hypergeek · · Score: 5

    Are you pondering what I'm pondering, Pinky?

    --
    Stay up hacking each weekend. Sleep is for the week.
  6. Maybe, maybe not by para_droid · · Score: 5
    This reminds me of several things I have been thinking about recently:

    Evolution is not just about survival, it is about breeding. Individuals with poor genes may survive, but no hot chicks will want to fuck them, so they will not pass those genes on.

    Many 'nerds' and other less-than-prime specimens are able to attract women through their high salaries and material security. However, studies have shown that up to 50% of their children were actually conceived in extra-marital affares with hot young studs, because women have a deep instinct to get the best DNA for their offspring.

    Many people with what would be considered 'undesirable' genes are able to mate quite easily with other ugly, stupid people. Just look at an episode of Jerry Springer for evidence of this. There is a theory that these people are breeding faster (a girl's IQ is proportional to the age at which she first gets knocked up, and inversley to the number of children she eventually has) and therefore evolution is decreasing our average IQ.

    Many of the markers developed by evolution to pick out potential mates are actually quite accidental 'red herrings' that are now propogated through the mechanism of evolution, but serve no real purpose. For instance, one day a caveman decides he finds large breasts attractive. He marries a girl with big tits. All his children inherit his desire for breasts, and also look for wives with big knockers. Eventually, having large breasts is considered a desirable quality in a mate, even though it serves no real purpose.

    Abashed the Devil stood,
    And felt how awful goodness is