Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mice Created With Human Brain Cells

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the what-exactly-is-the-yuck-factor dept.

pin_gween writes "Scientists have added 100,000 human brain cells to mice in an effort to create realistic models of disorders like Parkinson's Disease. Although mice are 97.5 percent genetically identical to humans and it sounds like a large number, 100,000 only represents 0.1% of the number of cells in mice brains. FTA: 'It's true that there is a huge amount of similarity, but the differences are huge,' Snyder said. 'You will never ever have a little human trapped inside a mouse or monkey's body. [...] Researchers are nevertheless beginning to bump up against what bioethicists call the "yuck factor." 'The worry is if you humanize them too much you cross certain boundaries,' said David Magnus, director of the Stanford Medical Center for Biomedical Ethics. 'But I don't think this research comes even close to that.'"

15 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. well i think by know1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    " 'The worry is if you humanize them too much you cross certain boundaries,' said David Magnus, director of the Stanford Medical Center for Biomedical Ethics. 'But I don't think this research comes even close to that.'"

    it's the thin end of the wedge. maybe this wasn't human enough...and nor will the next infinitessimally small step...but one day it will be too far and we won't have even realised

    1. Re:well i think by rooftop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And maybe with the next small step they cure Parkinson's disease. Maybe it's my secular mind, but i find killing and disecting millions of mice far worse than "upsetting god" by growing an ear on a mouse or putting in some human cells.

      If the mice are happy and not in constant pain or anything, i don't really see what's wrong with it. Evolution creates new species all the time.

    2. Re:well i think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And who knows who is having "fun" in the animal world? Did they ask the chimp or the cat if it was fun?

      I think the point was that standard mammilian behavior includes atrocities and brutality (all mammals).

    3. Re:well i think by simul · · Score: 2, Insightful

      by the standards of someone who lived 100 years ago, a man walking around after a massive heart attack would be considered a "zombie". there was serious ethical discussion of whether a heart attack should be intervened with at all. today, and angioplasty is an inexpensive, routine operation.

      bacteria with human dna now produce insulin inexpensively enough for poor diabetics to live full lives. it was not long ago that the pivelige of living a normal life as a diabetic was reserved for the wealthy.

      having seen my grandson meet my grandfather (which he would not have otherwise been able to do), i can only feel that the true monsters are the ones who, through fear and intimidation, would try to put an end to human progress

      there is no too far. lets go all the way.

    4. Re:well i think by Mojojojo+Monkey+Inc. · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How do you know the chimps aren't having fun while also increasing their chances of reproduction by kicking some rival chimp ass? Why not just apply that same principle to humans and say that eliminating the "competition" (by whatever means, regardless of how much the individual enjoys it) is giving one group an evolutionary advantage, thus any "fun" experienced by the brain is simply a genetic expression of the desire to propagate?

      Or conversely, one could argue that the cats are honing their paw-eye coordination by smacking around a dying rat, or maybe they're passing those skills along to their offspring, so there's something useful happening besides mere malice. Chasing around injured rodents is Hunting 101 for kittens.

      Basically you can look at this in a variety of ways depending on what your starting opinion is.

  2. Re:97.5% genetically identical by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so is all this 97.5% like generic organ, dna stuff?

    You're about 50% banana.

    i dont see the similarities between humans and mice

    You obviously haven't even looked at a banana very closely, let alone a mouse. About the only difference a lifeform from the proverbial Mars would see between a human and a mouse would be scale. We are virtually identical to mice in every detail but stature.

    If you want learn human anatomy, disect a chicken, and a chicken isn't even a mammal.

    KFG

  3. Keeping a tally... by Metasquares · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So far we have super-strong, long-lived, regenerating mice with human brain cells. We're getting pretty close to "the mice of NIMH".

  4. Re:97.5% genetically identical by grimJester · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They are mammals. Most of their bodies work the same as ours although they are on different scales. They have muscle tissue, brain tissue, eyes, a skeleton etc. that work the same way ours do. They are similar enough to us that many/most of the same drugs that work on us work on them. Apart from size and shape there are no major differences.

  5. Re:97.5% genetically identical - ah yes, but by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 2, Insightful
    In that same vein:

    A brick house is virtually identical to a pile of sand in every detail but stature.

  6. "Boundaries" by base_chakra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The worry is if you humanize them too much you cross certain boundaries

    How about if we cross a different barrier and drop the anthropocentric bullshit.

  7. The myth of the poor mouse by SimianOverlord · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mice and Rats in research are supposed to be pitied, by the usual pathetic ways that humans impart everything around them with the feelings or emotions which we possess. Actually, you should look at some facts.

    FACT: Mice in the wild live about a year, in the most stressful, difficult and inhumane conditions you wouldn't like to imagine. Should they be unfortunate to gain access to one of the animal rights protestors habitat, middle class suburbia, the self same protestor, full of indignation at experimental killing, will of course call in someone to rid them of their little problem, or condemn them to freeze to death in wooded areas with humane capture traps. In the lab, mus musculus live on average about 2 years in controlled, warm conditions with regular feeding and exercise.

    FACT: Rats in the wild live about 2 years max, again in stressful, disease ridden cramped conditions. In the lab, Rats can survive double that, again in nicely ordered, well controlled and comfortable conditions.

    So don't bring up that ignorant rubbish about how animal experiments somehow harm rats and mice: unlike Joe Public taking potshots at rats and mice in his backyard, everything WE do is sanctioned, pored over and refined each and every step of the way to minimise suffering. Hell, our animals are no use for experimentation if they're unhappy or agitated: they get difficult to handle. We go to see them and handle them a couple of weeks before expts even start to get them used to our presence, smell, voices etc.

    Rats and mice are far better treated in our labs than in the wild or in your homes, and they are also better treated than the conveyor belt of cattle fattened and slaughtered for your own diet. I get angered by the hypocrisy of people opposed to experimentation while conveniently overlooking the animal suffering inherent in large scale production of meat in all the developed world, with cattle stunned with bolt guns wandering into saws. It's so much easier to criticise someone else than look at your won behaviour, isn't it?

    --
    Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
  8. Re:97.5% genetically identical by mcvos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We are virtually identical to mice in every detail but stature.

    We also have some extra bits in our brain that seem to make a lot of difference.

    In fact, those differences in our brains are probably the reason why they need to put human brain cells in mice in order to study Parkinson.

  9. Re:It has already gone too far... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2, Insightful
    There are those of us that thing animal experimentation is already an example of crossing the boundaries of what science can do ethically. (I always get flamed for saying this on slashdot...)
    Flamed, or presented with counter-arguments?

    I think it is fine to kill or hurt animals to provide clothing, food, to test medications, and to advance science in general. I also think we should keep the suffering of the animals in question to a minimum, and that our use of animals should stop when there are good alternatives. (No, vegan diets and human test subjects are not viable alternatives)

    In this case, there is no good alternative to tinkering with mice, and the knowledge gained is valuable enough. Let them continue, I say.
    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  10. There is a difference by Shihar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At least, they wont be too "human" and so, they will not destroy and kill other species only for fun. This right, we cannot give to any other animal, because we can easily lost our "superiority".

    You have never owned a cat, have you? You could have the fattest and most well fed cat on the earth, and that vicious creature will still merrily kill anything smaller then it just for shits and giggles. In fact, not only do they kill the poor critter, but if they can, they will terrorize it before they kill it. You have never seen sadism until you have seen a cat corner a creature smaller then it.

    If anything, the poor critters of the earth should be thankful that they got smart monkeys with some level of empathy towards each other and other critters rather then a race of smart cats.

    Claims that humans are any different in their destructive impulses from other animals are down right silly. If any base emotion separates humanity from other animals, it is empathy. No other animal I know of keeps pets simply because we enjoy the company of other non-human species. No animal I know of tries to feed and help those outside of its social group. No animal I know of shows any sort of restraint or preservationist feeling when dealing with the environment.

    If there is a difference between humanity and the rest of the animal kingdom, it isn't in aggression or joy in killing. Many other animals merrily murder anything outside of its immediate social circle. Hell, many other animals merrily murder anything INSIDE its social circle. If there is some base desire that humanity holds that other animals appear to lack, it is the empathy to RESTRAIN from giving into base desires for aggression and destruction of those that are outside of our social circle.

  11. Re:97.5% genetically identical by ajnsue · · Score: 2, Insightful

    DNA is composed largely of bulky templates for how to make specific proteins. It also contains very detailed and elegant instructions on the expression of those proteins. The minor changes in those instructions make major differences in the end product.
    A battleship and a toaster contain pretty much 95% of the same materials list - metals, plastics and such. But the instructions how much and how to assemble those materials make the difference.