Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Create Mice From 2 Fathers
An anonymous reader writes "Using stem cell technology, reproductive scientists in Texas, led by Dr. Richard R. Behringer at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, have produced male and female mice from two fathers. The study was posted Wednesday at the online site of the journal Biology of Reproduction. The achievement of two-father offspring in a species of mammal could be a step toward preserving endangered species, improving livestock breeds, and advancing human assisted reproductive technology. It also opens the provocative possibility of same-sex couples having their own genetic children, the researchers note."
It also opens the provocative possibility of same-sex couples having their own genetic children, the researchers note.
This isn't going to go down well with the God Squad.
welcome our new gaylords. Or gaylings. whatever.
All the world needs is bloody gay mice.
Now instead of the mice in my house just eating my cheese, I have to worry about them reupholstering my furniture.
Scientists said they were able to able to achieve this remarkable result by "forcing a mouse to have sex with his father."
And...
Human trials of the new procedure are set to begin in January 2011.
And also...
When asked if he was concerned that his son might object to being forced to participate in this study, Mr. Anonymous Coward Sr. responded "This is a life or death situation here. My son had 38 years to go out and find a real woman to procreate with - but instead he spent all his time in my down in our basement twittering with his Ham radio. He had his chance to spread his seed around and pass on our genetic legacy, but he wasted it. Now it's my turn to take over and make sure that we've got a suitable heir to the family dynasty. My son can push back as much as he wants, but as far as I'm concerned, that's only going to make my job that much easier."
Yeah yeah yeah. Just two fathers. That's some trick there, getting a male to generate a fetus. What an age we live in.
Cut me a break, and at least report that a female was in some way required, OK? I know it does not have the same "zing" as a story not involving females at all, but still.
The same could be said about IV fertilization and other fertility treatments. In fact, the same thing WAS said about them, but it was a strawman every bit there as it is here. You don't even know what's gonna happen, yet you have no problem with conjuring the image of numerous "monstrous fetuses" that die "soon after birth", apparently in an attempt to provoke both disgust and sympathy in your audience on the same time. Who's gonna think of the monster children?
Well, then life's a bitch and then your zygote dies.
The Y chromosome is not a variant of the X chromosome. The X chromosome is one you actually need. The Y chromosome actually has very little information, and most of it related to testosterone production and sperm production. It doesn't even encode most of the differences between a male and a female body. Those are already taken care of by other proteins and testosterone.
In programming terms the Y chromosome is a little more than just a flag, but basically at an oversimplified level you can view it as a flag. The real important information is elsewhere.
So basically it's akin to, dunno, if you took out the .exe from the world of warcraft directory, but flagged it as Cataclysm compatible twice. It ain't gonna be very useful.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
You think that's bad? How about, now when the boss rides your ass all afternoon, you can actually get pregnant? Man, trust science to make IT and programming jobs even shittier ;)
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
No, I don't agree. And what does it have to do with making human-animal hybrids? And what would be wrong with that, anyway? I'd do that -- well, I don't have the knowledge to be able to, but I certainly wouldn't protest if someone else did it. Surely you can see the advantage of having a human head/brain and the body of a horse?
Is it wrong if the first thing that flashed through my mind was "porn industry would love it"?
I think that a lot of slashdotters are thinking of the advantage of doing it the other way round to GP's suggestion , like the body of a woman and the brain of a rabbit.
So the same method can theoretically be applied to two sperms from the same male. I can be the father and mother of my own child then.
Should he/she be considered my "child" or my "clone"?
Search RapidShare and MegaUpload!
75% of a person!
the Y is a Y because its an X missing a bit, and when creating a person the missing it on the Y just defaults to the bit on the X
Perhaps "bit" is an understatement: the Y have roughly 80 genes, while the X has around 2000; the Y is about 4 times smaller than the X.
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
I'm reading Oxygen by Nick Lane, and recreating with male mitochondria is a universal no no. Even worms while forming excrete the male mitochondria from the gametes used to form it.
The male mitochondria passed on is aged and defective, the female mitochondria an unused preserved version.
In other words, there's a reason it doesn't work the way it's being forced to work. That's why we have sexes. Thank God or evolution, your choice.
rd
I'm chronically heterosexual, but I have to say that if there is a genetic imperfection that needs to be fixed, it is the genetic imperfection that produces offspring that equate homosexually with pedophilia and bestiality. The goat and the child cannot consent, but an adult male can, and if psychology is right those on that side of the debate are also often deathly afraid that they might. Furthermore, smoking crystal meth is a choice, at least the first time you do it, yet most people are perfectly OK with judging that behavior and saying it it morally wrong, even though they preach freedom of choice. Either the whole human race is moronic on every issue (and I admit an argument to that effect could be made), or these things are not as clear cut as you assert them to be.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Would you like it if your mom was drunk that one night and got knocked up by a guy she didn't even know and that result is you?
No?
Gee, too bad, life ain't a request programme. You get what you're dealt.
Would I prefer if both my parents were guys who went through the hassle (legal, financial and otherwise) to have a child together and that child is me? Sure as fuck more than the alternative I gave above. Because one thing's sure: They definitely, truely and without a doubt WANTED me to be. I would've been no accident, not even a "happy coincidence", there is positively no way that I could have existed unless they really, really strongly wanted me to exist.
I honestly can't think of any better way to tell that parents WANT a child than going to impossible lengths to get one. Take in vitro. Does anyone doubt that these parents really wanted to have that child, an that this child will probably be loved more than many other kids who "just happened"?
Personally, I like the idea that my parents really wanted me.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If they believed that the person is alive at the moment of conception, they would FIGHT against raped women getting an abortion. After all , the person is a person at the moment of conception, be it a rape or consensual. But in practice this is not what happen, except for really a minority of pro life. Most accept that abortion is done in case of rape. And here is the cinch. From the point of view of the fecundated egg or whatever, there is NO DIFFERENCE whether it was a rape or not. if one give the CHOICE to the women to abort in case of rape, DESPITE having the fecundated egg considered a human at conception, then there is no reason from the fecundated egg side to NOT give the same choice in case the egg was fecundated in any other situation than rape. No, the only reason to make a difference , is to hinge whether the fecundation was consensual or not, ergo, the reason is not depending on the egg being fecundated, the life begin, but rather, the reason being was the sex consensual or not. In other word I would wager this is more a PUNISHMENT for having consensual sex, rather than to save a life started. In other word, the "life start at fecundation" is bullshit. If it was not, then they would loudly and clearly say that raped women should not be aborted. They should just admit that they wish to see the women punished for having sex.