Slashdot Mirror
Human-Mouse Hybrids?
scientistguy writes "There is a remarkable story by Nicholas Wade in the early
morning edition of the New York Times about a discussion to create human-mouse
hybrid organisms. One of these techniques involves the introduction of genetically altered mouse embryonic stem (ES) cells (e.g. with
genes 'knocked-out' or replaced) into a developing mouse blactocyst to create progeny hybrid organisms. Typically, these progeny organisms are then bred to unaltered mice to see
if the genetic alteration has gone germline or is heritable. If heritable, mice can be bred and
animals which are homozygous for the altered gene can be phenotypically examined as long as the manipulation is not homozygous lethal or cause
sterility in a single copy state. Unless using
blastocysts from immunologically crippled mice, there would most likely be a recognition of non-self by murine immune cells not educated (which haven't seen during their development) to the human cells that would wipe them out. Nonetheless, it's amazing that it's
being contemplated due to the ethical implications of such an experiment. What if it were viable? What if there were more than just a few
human cells? Could it be sacrificed? ... or even experimented on further if part 'human'? Perhaps these
types of experiments are best relegated to little known, deserted islands far
away from the reaches of civilization (or perhaps regulation) ..."
This kind of research always frightens the snot out of me. Without trying to sound like a holier-than-thou type, I can't help but think that this type of science is dabbling a little beyond the realm of what we should be working on.
On the bright side, I would suspect that such organisms don't live long enough to make a whole lot of difference. Some odd hybrid creature created through such means would be bound to have some hideous problems.
Maybe there is some benefit to this type of research, where we will get better medicines, or a better understanding of how our own body is put together. That said, I disagree with the method.
Flame away.
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
These kind of moves are actually dangerous. If the civilized world chooses to ban something of some reason (hopefully a good one), one can just go to a poor country and be fully legal.
We recently saw this when an oil tanker collapsed just off the coast of Spain. The tanker was registerd in Bermuda (or somewhere around there). Thus it was sheaper taxwise, less regulated working-environment and safety wise and could therefore go to sea without being sea worthy.
We can also see this in the research of the (somewhat) mad Italian sientist, Dr. Severino Antinori. He claims to creating the first cloned human and that it is going to be born early next year. He refuses to say where the experiment has been made, but it is in a country with weaker legalization than most western contries.
To sum things up. This type of experiments will probably have to go to some little known, desterd island, but I regret that they can.
Build a better mousetrap! Seriously, we shouldn't be dabbling in this stuff until we truly understand what's going on (as much as we can before experimenting). Are the conveniences/insights worth the risks?
Not as simple as that I'm afraid.
Humans have approximately 30,000 genes which make 100,000 proteins. We have to understand more than the DNA to do this, there needs to be more research into all the mechanism involved. Or in terms that the reader is more likely to understand, the DNA is the source however the compiler our cells use has a whole heap of interesting switches that we don't understand.
The real question is whether our methods are sound or unsound -- not whether we should be there or not.
There are no realms of human knowledge where we should not be working. Who can make such a determination in the first place? The ways to get there, on the other hand, should be considered carefully but on a strictly secular level.
It's unfortunate that in the zeal to categorically ban all human cloning George Bush's administration has been unable to make this distinction.
The quest for knowledge must not be hindered by emotional, baseless "forbidden realms of knowledge" kind of arguments. If we allow that, the renessaince and enlightenment have been in vain and we're back in the dark ages burning witches.
The owls are not what they seem
I was thinking the same thing, but reading the article I see the submitter incorrectly described what they're doing -- they're making a chimera of human stem cells and mouse blastocysts. If not quite a half-mouse, half-human it's far closer to it than a recombinant organism with a gene or two from a different species.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Ethical problems don't exist... It's a made up thing, a simple case of "I believe this, so I will force it upon you".
That aside, we will have a problem as the line between human and animal blurs... Should we raise all animals to the level of humans wrt the rights they have? Probably not a good idea. I think we need to ignore the preachers, the churches, the "won't somebody think of the children" pretenders pushing for their own power, and set a strict definition of what defines a living, breathing, human being, and what is a clumb of cells related to, or with the potential to someday be a human being... I believe it's right for experiments to be done on month old foetuses, but I don't think it's right to do the same thing on one that could live if born prematurely....
perhaps I'm rambling and incoherent, I was just trying to raise a couple of points.
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
First a minor nitpick - Remicade (and Enbrel and EPO etc) are actually made in mammalian cells. Chinese Hamster Ovary cells to be precise.
Second, I would submit that an even more striking example of the principle your presenting is the "Abgenix" mouse, a mouse whose IgG genes have been replaced by human genes so that the immunoglobulins it produces are clearly human. Also, type "human mouse hybrid" into Google and learn about murine cells with entire human chromosomes used to study telomerase
I guess the argument here is one of degree - many more human genes will be present in the hybrids described here. Also, they will be self-sustaining organisms in a way that cell lines really aren't. But on the whole I agree with you, this is just another step in a journey already begun.
I can't help but think that this type of science is dabbling a little beyond the realm of what we should be working on.
You've just described popular opinion about most branches of science on the verge of breaktrhough, including biology (genetics) and particle physics (splitting the atom), among others. If we stopped science when it was deemed "beyong the realm of what we should be working on", we'd be living in caves.
An instance of "civilized" country has been recently letting the religious right decide what can and what can not be researched. Steem-cell and cloning studies are being banned because some religious texts were interpreted as saying that this sort of thing is "unholy". As it is, people who does not share this view of the Universe will eventually find ways to keep studying these subjects somewhere else. I don't regret it, because after carefull consideration I find the maddest scientist far saner than the saner right-wing fundamentalist.
Also, moving services and "dirty" plants to unregulated countries and the subsequent pressure (mostly economic but sometimes even military) to keep these countries unregulated is caused mainly by the major corporations of "civilized" Western countries, not by mad scientists or WTO eco-freaks. You should ask yourself who is served by a cheaper oil tanker (or a cheaper Nike produce by Vietnamese semi-slaves).
Boys and girls, they are talking about sticking a human stem cell into a mouse embryo and seeing if the thing lives, breeds true and still carries the human cells.
Big whup.
A mouse with human cells in it is guess what? A MOUSE. A mouse brain made out of human cells is a MOUSE BRAIN. It is not Aunt Mabel, it will not ask to vote in the next election.
They already have a strain of mice that has human immune system markers. It was developed for the purpose of studying and hopefully curing AIDS, and it is working nicely. God forbid we should ever do that again, right?
Worst case scenario, Mouse A and B have "human" sperm and eggs, they mate, and the female DIES during the first trimester because a big 'ol human embryo is growing in there and the mouse is too small.
Bummer.
Ever hear of "late term abortion"? That's where they kill a live human baby right before it gets born. Disgusting practice that is done occasionaly in Canadian and American hospitals, thankfully rare, normally performed on deformed, non-viable babies that are going to die anyway, and die ugly. But not always.
Ever hear of test tube babies? That's an artificially fertilized egg that grows into a blastocyst before they implant a dozen of them in the mother. What do you think they do with the "extra" ones?
How about plain old normal abortion? That's where you remove a perfectly good human embryo and kill it on purpose because mummy was too stupid to use birth control, or occasionally because the ultrasound shows something unfortunate, like two arms, one leg and no head.
Spare me the "ethical considerations" of human stem cell research on mice.
These precious discussions are just so much bullshit compared to what goes on in hospitals and fertility clinics ever day. If you are going to have abortion and artificial fertilization and the rest of it, then whining about stem cells in mice is idiotic.
You wanna have a cure for cancer, AIDS and etc? Maybe cheap organ replacements for when your's screw up? New skin for burn victims? New drugs that work? This is what it takes. Suck it up.
In America, you have rights simply because you are a human being; The color of your skin, or how old or young you are, or how smart or dumb you are, or whether you can walk, or who your parents are, shouldn't matter. Being born out-of-wedlock to a teenage mother doesn't (or shouldn't) doom you to a life of poverty and minimum-wage jobs, and being born to rich parents is no guarantee of being a success yourself.
We take pride in protecting the rights of the weak, and we should -- both the weak in numbers, and the weak compared to the rest of us. We have laws against discrimination of minorities, and we have laws requiring things for those with disabilities.
So why would we chose not to protect the weakest among us? Why should we be allowed to perform experiments on a human being just because he can't talk yet, or doesn't look like one yet? Why should a human being be denied a chance at living a full life, simply because her parents find her inconvenient?
It's arbitrarily dening a certain class of human beings their rights so they can be exploited by others -- completely against the principles of democracy our country is based on.
TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.
The greatest treatment breakthroughs of the last 30 years have all been made using host cells as test beds - heck, all of the medical treatments that are based on real science have arisen from this type of research. The social implications of full-fledged hybrids certainly need to be addressed, but these new experiments are likely to prove pivotal to biomedical research.
If you're taking a stand against hybridization, then you need to take a stand against all hybridization. If you're against these techniques, then you need to be against every bit of real bio-science that has ever happened, is happening, and is about to happen. You need to personally refuse any treatment in which recombinant techniques have been used in research. If you're going to make a stand against this science (and science as a whole), you need to understand the repercussions. You need to know that you stand against the research that has yielded methods to repair paralyzing nervous system damage. You need to know that you stand against the research that saved your father when he had his heart attack.
Personally I'm grateful that we no longer use medival medical techinques and that we have a decent understanding of what it takes to keep us alive. I think if you're not eager to see people live, and live disease-free and happy, then you're the oddity.
They already are, we just don't speak mouse-ese. What, you were expecting the mouse to pipe up in English and bust out with "I say old bean, could you please not stick that scalpel up my ass?"
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
An instance of "civilized" country has been recently letting the religious right decide what can and what can not be researched. Steem-cell and cloning studies are being banned because some religious texts were interpreted as saying that this sort of thing is "unholy".
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.