Slashdot Mirror
Jocks v. Nerds: Detecting Gene-Dopers
kevinvee writes "The World Anti-Doping Agency will soon put into place gene doping tests to detect athletes using gene therapy. Perhaps the most important part to recognize is that Congress delegates have said that gene doping is a 'clear and present danger.' Professor Geoff Goldspink mentions this of gene therapy: 'We can put genes into mice and create Arnold Schwarzenegger mice.' So, be sure to watch next year's elections for furry white mice."
Does this mean that instead of running around the maze, they suddenly start running for governor?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Vote Algernon in 2004!
Moo
So, be sure to watch next year's elections for furry white mice.
So, are you saying the incumbent will be getting a little NR2B gene therapy? (For those Slashdotters who are not neuroscientists, NR2B keeps the NMDA receptor in nervous tissues from desensitizing, apparently making learning in mice easier).
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
a 25% increase in muscle mass in 2 weeks
So, I can go from an 80 pound weakling to a 100 pound beefcake in the time it takes me to compile Gentoo on my P2-300?
Those jocks from highschool are going to be sorry they shoved me in my locker...
everyday...
twice.
And thus, the hunt for the mutants has begun.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
If there was a performance-enhancing chemical that was completely safe, I say it is fair, because its use does not involve serious risk. That said, I think the IOC doesn't see it that way.
So my question is, is gene therapy dangerous? If it is, then it probably should be banned. But if not, then why not allow it? At some point, doesn't it seem kind of arbitrary which things are allowed and which are not?
I'm sorry, but I think the probability of safe gene-doping existing is still well-within the realm of science fiction. And even if it existed, so what? Does that mean that if I dope with Michael Johnson's genes and go into a meet against Michael Johnson, that I will have an advantage? Would johnson have to quit the meet if they deem that his natural genes are better than the other athletes? And some gene therapies have caused death. it's not that stable. What we've found is that at the olympic level, training and diet do far more for atheletic performance than faddish treatments. Maybe this would be used in bodybuilding where they through all sorts of chemicals at their bodies, but I doubt it for the performance events. And finally, whether it's valid or not, they've gotten too zealous about the testing. The cold medicine disqualification of the russian gymnast last olympics is an example of how things have gone too far.
>'We can put genes into mice and create Arnold Schwarzenegger mice.'
Amazing how far genetic insertion therapy has come. They can take an insider GOP mouse with no political experience and turn him into an overly-built "outsider" catch-phrase spewing governor?
"Once the technology exists for medical use disreputable people will be putting the stuff in athletes," he warned.
If people want to do that with their bodies, let them.
I think much of this fear of doping has to do with the fact that the olympic committee and sports clubs just don't want the futility of their "competitions" exposed. Right now, they tenuously maintain some illusion of participatory sports.
What difference should it make to anybody whether some olympic athlete pumps himself full of genes? Those people are so far removed from regular human beings that it is like watching a carnival side show anyway.
If you like sports, do it yourself. Compete, in a friendly way, with people you know and like. Anything else is not sports but voyeurism and soap opera.
The earth, everyone knows, was commissioned by the white mice as a great computer to compute the question to Life, the Universe, and Everything, for which the answer is 42, and was built by the custom luxury planet builders of Magrithea, although it was destroyed just before it had found the question.
... So what would happen was that the mice would run round mazes and things so that the whole nature of the learning process could be examined. From our observations of their behavior we were able to learn all sorts of things about our own...'
"'These creatures you call mice, you see, they are not quite as they appear. They are merely the protrusion into our dimension of vastly hyperintelligent pandimensional beings. The whole business with the chesse and the squeaking is just a front.'
The old man pause, and with a sympathetic frown continued. 'They've been experimenting on you, I'm afraid.'
Arthur thought about this for a seond, and then his face cleared.
'Ah no,' he said, 'I see the source of the misunderstanding now. No, look, you see what happened was that we used to do experiements on them.
Arthur's voice trailed off.
'Such subtlety...' said Slartibartfast, 'one has to admire it.'"
CF is a disease that could be perfectly treated by gene therapy... it comes from a single defect, though the defect itself can vary, in the cell membrane Chloride channel. Treat the defect, and you can avoid all the consequences of CF (pneumonia, pancreatitis, sterility, Pseudomonas colonization, etc). CF is one of the most common genetic diseases, and is THE most common lethal genetic defect among caucasians.
For the non-medical, non-bio-science geeks, Here's some info courtesy of the NIH. Much like genetic counseling for various hemoglobinopathies, an argument can be made for the same approach here, particularly since some estimates put the CF gene prevalance at 5% in the white/northern european population.
Curiously, there's speculation as to how that gene became so prevalant... it appears to be protective against Cholera, and perhaps some other diarrheal illnesses. Additionally, it may also offer some resistance against Typhoid. The theory has been advanced that partial resistance among heterozygotes provided a genetic advantage during the plagues of humanity's past, which included Typhoid and Cholera.
KFG: I've taken care of many CF patients... Do you mind terribly if I ask your approximate age?
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
This is an interesting question - I can see that they would not allow a genetically modified super-athlete to compete, but what about that person's children? They may still carry the genes, yet those genes were passed on to them naturally. Will having on genetically modified ancestor (say to make them stronger to resist cancer) ruin an entire family's chances of ever competing in international sports? If not, how many generations must occur without genetic modification before the modified-gene advantage is considered diluted enough?
These are all questions that need to be answered once we get into this debate.