NIH Plans To Lift Ban On Research Funds For Part-Human, Part-Animal Embryos
Source: NPR
The federal government announced plans Thursday to lift a moratorium on funding of certain controversial experiments that use human stem cells to create animal embryos that are partly human.
The National Institutes of Health is proposing a new policy to permit scientists to get federal money to make embryos, known as chimeras, under certain carefully monitored conditions.
Read more: http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/08/04/488387729/nih-plans-to-lift-ban-on-research-funds-for-part-human-part-animal-embryos
And so it begins.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
christx30
(6,241 posts)Please tell me they're going to be called manimals. That would just make my day when I'm getting my crossbow ready to defend my family.
But I for one, welcome our new overlords, and hope they rule with an even hand.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)
mountain grammy
(29,003 posts)
sweetloukillbot
(12,744 posts)Shandris
(3,447 posts)Amazing. 
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)Shandris
(3,447 posts)Thank you for the article though; I had somehow overlooked that, and as I heard that odd theory I was like 'yeah, nah, too out there'. Woah.
Puts Thundercats in a whole new light, that's for damn sure. 0.0
niyad
(132,113 posts)mark twain
the full quote:
Of all God's creatures there is only one that cannot be made the slave of the lash. That one is the cat. If man could be crossed with the cat it would improve man, but it would deteriorate the cat.
- Notebook, 1894
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)Poor cats..another bright idea from the human species.
JudyM
(29,785 posts)
Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)Oh, well.
Cross humans with cyanobacteria to make them photosynthetic. Then we'll have a true Green Party. 
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)... we should be okay.
Like nuclear weapons.
JOKING!
I would need to read more about possible benefits before passing judgment. I have a rare condition that causes blindness (already blind in one eye). It's not nearly the same thing as creating chimeras, but mice that had their genetic code altered to cause the same problems have helped researchers understand the disease better.
pnwmom
(110,254 posts)So I wouldn't reject this out of hand.
However, years ago I was on a committee that reviewed University research and was surprised about the casual attitude of some of the researchers. They proposed using sperm from a sperm bank without getting permission from the donors for this use. That didn't seem right to me -- but a couple scientists on the committee thought it would be fine. I don't remember what the final decision was, but it still seems wrong to use donated sperm in this manner without getting permission.
Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)Unless the donors are aware or signed off on any use of the sperm (or eggs for women), that shouldn't be done.
As humans, we have contracts with each other.
I don't like any research that causes pain and suffering either, although I obviously made a concession on the mice that go blind by having a gene altered -- same as the human one that's defective in my case. It's not like it HURTS, though, and the mice are fed and looked after.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)BTW: I am an atheist.
Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)I'd like to see the various guidelines put in place.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)... with a wary eye on human and corporate arrogance.
Science is behind almost all of the wealth of humanity, although most scientists don't benefit from it compared to businessmen/corporations.
I'm thankful for insecticides and government programs that prevent mosquitoes from making life miserable and more deadly in populated urban areas, among many other things.
I don't like to see sentient creatures suffer, and we should be cautious in that regard.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)with its own identity and sentience?
Does humanity have the right to own it, imprison it, enslave it and erase it at will?
Humanity is full of stories of human cruelty and ignorance.
Just because something can bedone does not mean it should be done.
Mosquito control is one thing. But hybridization?
Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)... restrictions on brain research that could cause such a thing.
I admit that, based on my personal interactions, I probably place more faith in scientists and their judgments than most people. I personally wish they'd be in charge of our nuclear arsenal rather than some potential nitwit President.
EDIT: And if there was ever a viable "Science Party" in this country, I'd probably join it. As of now, most scientists are overwhelmingly Democrats and independents.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2010/12/lab_politics.html
A Pew Research Center Poll from July 2009 showed that only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans; 55 percent are Democrats, 32 percent are independent, and the rest "don't know" their affiliation.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Corporations.
Buckeye_Democrat
(15,526 posts)I have a rare genetic condition that causes early blindness. I went blind in one eye already.
I started experiencing distortions in the other eye about two years later, an indicator that blindness would soon follow.
My ophthalmologist suggested an experimental drug that had shown great success, and I signed a legal waiver to have it injected in my eyeball. It worked! The distortions went away and blindness was thwarted until the next time that distortions were observed. I've received about 25 injections over the last 10 years, and I still have my eyesight in one eye. I would otherwise be disabled, unable to drive and most likely receiving government disability for blindness.
The drug is called Avastin. It was developed by scientists at Genentech to treat colon cancer. For those patients, it's injected into their bloodstream from IV bags. It's not a very effective treatment for colon cancer compared to others, so there's many times that hospitals don't use those IV bags at all. Based on how it works on cancer cells, ophthalmologists in Florida decided to try the drug to treat patients experiencing similar problems to mine. It proved extremely effective, and word spread of this wonderful eye treatment.
I started to go into lengthy details, but I deleted it. I'll just cut to the chase and tell you that, a few years ago, the owners of Genentech decided to be greedy and tried to make it illegal for ophthalmologists to divide those unused IV bags of Avastin. They claimed that they were "concerned" about the drug being contaminated during the division into smaller samples, and they wanted exclusive rights to sell the smaller samples under the name Lucentis for much higher cost. Instead of me paying $300 per injection, it was going to cost me about $2500 per injection under their proposal! Insurance would not help pay for it because Genentech didn't include people like me in the FDA study for Lucentis.
Thankfully, ophthalmologists all over the country raised a big stink about it and Genentech finally backed off. I feel confident that several scientists at Genentech were probably opposed to the greed as well, although I never heard any public statements from them (which would probably cost them their jobs).
Now that I've shared that, I'll just say that I ultimately think there's something fundamentally wrong with how legal contracts are written in this country. I'm not a lawyer, but I've observed many cases over the years when certain people become quite wealthy simply because they have a contract that gives them "ownership" of ideas and technology. I understand the basic idea behind patents and other contracts to reward people for their intellectual work, but it's reached the point where the intellectuals are given scraps for their work while business parasites reap the biggest rewards.
Even Bill Gates, who I appreciate in many ways for his philanthropic work, mostly became insanely wealthy due to legal contracts. He didn't develop DOS himself. He purchased it (and thus had legal ownership). He then used another contract with IBM to essentially have an early monopoly in computer software. I don't think it's a coincidence that Bill's father was a lawyer. By the way, I saw Bill Gates participating in a computer trivia contest many years ago, and I did better than him at answering the questions! I majored in math & physics, not computer science!
It;s ultimately how contracts are written (and enforced by our government) that causes many issues.
Back to the human-animal chimera issue... nobody is yet developing them to term. As of now, studies are underway to observe the fetuses to see if there's any unwanted results... such as the human stem cells interacting with the animal's brain and nervous system. The early results have apparently been promising. The animals have their genes altered to prevent them from forming a particular organ, and the human stem cells seem to only help form those organs. Without further study, scientists can't even be sure that ethical concerns are warranted. (Except from the same kinds of people who believe in souls and likely opposed human to human organ transplants as well.)
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Just because something can bedone does not mean it should be done..."
However, if something can be done, it will be done regardless of whether it should be done or not, regardless of ethical concerns and regardless of potential for abuse. Science as practiced by humans has both aptly and accurately illustrated this to us time and time again.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)
Kablooie
(19,103 posts)Archae
(47,245 posts)
Native
(7,349 posts)pnwmom
(110,254 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)
SharonClark
(10,497 posts)Humans have a long history of exploiting animals for greed, self-aggrandizement, and bogus medical research. What would be accomplished that could warrant something as ethically-challenged as hybridization?
uawchild
(2,208 posts)What a slippery slope. I can imagine all sorts of dystopian applications in the not so distant future.
Murphy's Law applied to genetic engineering is scary.
Native
(7,349 posts)I thought that was the scariest part of the article.
JudyM
(29,785 posts)mountain grammy
(29,003 posts)It sounds kind of creepy and a what could possibly go wrong scenario, but then, it could lead to great discoveries.
Renew Deal
(85,078 posts)
cstanleytech
(28,454 posts)elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)
Sunriser13
(612 posts)- a certain Cheeto's head isn't hanging out the patootie of the Putin-centaur spitting out little yellow Cheeto piles...
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)but I wasn't thinking the Putin variety 
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)
Festivito
(13,878 posts)JudyM
(29,785 posts)
harun
(11,381 posts)trof
(54,274 posts)
GOLGO 13
(1,681 posts)
Turin_C3PO
(16,385 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)
On the other hand...topless women centaurs! Yes!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]