|
|
Silver Dragon Breath dragon forums
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ragnarok
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 1091
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA.
|
 Posted: Sat 02 Aug 2008 18:54 Post subject: |
 |
|
Raya just said everything I would have, so...yeah. 
_________________
To win against an opponent stronger than yourself, you must not be weaker than that opponent. - Takamachi Nanoha |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hyraxylos
Shining Dragonstar
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Posts: 805
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
| Posted: Mon 11 Aug 2008 7:58 Post subject: |
|
|
I get it now. And it's gone from "not understood" to "just plain weird", along with a ton of other phenomena that seem to happen in biological studies. 
_________________
The statement below this one is false.
The statement above this one is true.
This statement is false. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
harrypottertew
Dragonstar
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
Posts: 105
Location: cant figure that out
|
| Posted: Fri 15 Aug 2008 9:01 Post subject: adaption in a hypothiesis. |
|
|
so what do you thing about gene splicing? do you think it is possible to change it over to the human world of society or do you think that may be years ahead of our own understanding?
i know that there are some things of the human dna we do not fully comprehend but what if that 10% was the ability to adapt to a different strain of dna? by the sounds of it... it can be possible but we do not know what the effects would be.
i say that we should experiment on the gene splicing on convicts who are sentenced to death so there would be no loss of humans or contamination of such. there are a few reasons to why i wish to see this happen but first i want to know everyone's opinion on the matter..
the top reason on top of my head is that we need to adapt and re configure ourselfs to better suit our lifestyle to the surroundings that we live at right now... why not become a animal hybrid if we can actually live with the earth instead of living aginst it.
_________________
forever shall i be a dragon friend even though i have not met one. forever let the dragons live free |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ragnarok
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 1091
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA.
|
| Posted: Fri 15 Aug 2008 9:21 Post subject: Re: adaption in a hypothiesis. |
|
|
I'm sure Raya will come up with a much more detailed response, but for the time being, I'll throw in my $.02.
| harrypottertew wrote: |
| i know that there are some things of the human dna we do not fully comprehend but what if that 10% was the ability to adapt to a different strain of dna? by the sounds of it... it can be possible but we do not know what the effects would be. |
The closest we can get to changing human DNA right now is gene therapy, and from what I've read, we're only beginning to be able to get that to work.
As for DNA, it is possible to insert a foreign segment into an animal (it's how we got the glowing mice and fish, for example), but those changes are made while the animal is still a single cell, not in a full-grown, mature individual. Changing DNA in large multicellular organisms is much, much harder.
| Quote: |
| i say that we should experiment on the gene splicing on convicts who are sentenced to death so there would be no loss of humans or contamination of such. there are a few reasons to why i wish to see this happen but first i want to know everyone's opinion on the matter.. |
Absolutely not. To experiment at all on individuals who are unwilling or are forced to be in the project is about as unethical as it is possible to get.
| Quote: |
| the top reason on top of my head is that we need to adapt and re configure ourselfs to better suit our lifestyle to the surroundings that we live at right now... why not become a animal hybrid if we can actually live with the earth instead of living aginst it. |
That's an interesting thing about people and culture. Genetic evolution plays almost no role in our day-to-day lives. Memetic evolution (the evolution of ideas, behaviors, etc) is where almost all our change has been. If you want to change people, then it's far easier to modify behavior than genetics.
_________________
To win against an opponent stronger than yourself, you must not be weaker than that opponent. - Takamachi Nanoha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rayadragon
Shining Dragonstar
Joined: 28 Oct 2003
Posts: 264
Location: Somewhere between reality and imagination
|
| Posted: Fri 15 Aug 2008 10:51 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I'm sure Raya will come up with a much more detailed response, but for the time being, I'll throw in my $.02 |
Of course!
| Quote: |
| so what do you thing about gene splicing? |
By gene splicing I think you mean genetic or genome splicing. "Gene" would refer to just one gene, whereas "genetic" and "genome" would refer to multiple.
| Quote: |
do you think it is possible to change it over to the human world of society or do you think that may be years ahead of our own understanding?
|
It's years in the future, if at all. Even if the technology were avaliable, I don't think it will ever be readily avaliable or commonly done. The ethical debate would be massive on this, and I'm sure more likely than not that unless it's a major quality-of-life issue, it would hard for the population at large to use it (think life-threatening disorder v.s. something to increase athletic ability).
| Quote: |
| The closest we can get to changing human DNA right now is gene therapy, and from what I've read, we're only beginning to be able to get that to work |
*nods rapidly* For some background info, since I'm not sure if I've brought it up recently (although I always feel like I'm bragging or claiming general superiority when I do), I'm actually studying for my Ph.D in genetics (and now hopefully a couple of months away from actually graduating), and my thesis work IS gene therapy. Keep in mind that "gene therapy" is a huge generalization.
There have been several gene therapy trials that have been sucessful, but the number of patients has always been small. There's also been a number of "adverse events," aka severe complications during some of these trials. The one that I'm most familiar with was a trial in 2002 or 2003 or so, in which children with X-linked Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Disorder (X-SCID, aka "bubble boy" syndrome) were treated by giving them a working copy of the gene that was bad (or rather, a subset of their cells were given the gene, which was then transplanted into the patients). Of the 11 first reported patients treated (treatment = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$), most showed clinical correction of the disease. However, 3 of those patients developed leukemia because of complications of the treatment. This was a completly unexpected result. Now we know a bit better what happened, but even though we know what went wrong, it's not exactly an easy thing to fix.
That being said, there have been sucessful trials without any issues and some with issues that were unrelated to the gene therapy itself.
| Quote: |
| As for DNA, it is possible to insert a foreign segment into an animal (it's how we got the glowing mice and fish, for example), but those changes are made while the animal is still a single cell, not in a full-grown, mature individual. Changing DNA in large multicellular organisms is much, much harder |
Can't really add to this other than to say it is NOT an easy process. Let alone the ethics of doing this in humans.
Minor correction on the transgenic animal generation. You're right that it's a single cell start, but it's not the final "animal" that's altered. Cells that carry the transgene are injected into an embryo, which (if it survives) creates a chimeric animal that may or may not have altered cells in gamete producing organs. You basically have to breed the resulting animals toghether to see if the offspring carry the mutations. It's different than cloning of an adult organism, which is when the final animal is grown from the single altered cell.
EDIT: Correction to my correction. You can make transgenic animals just like what Ragnarok said. The way I described is applied almost only to mice because of the avaliability of embryonic stem cell lines.
| Quote: |
| i say that we should experiment on the gene splicing on convicts who are sentenced to death so there would be no loss of humans or contamination of such. |
NO
| Quote: |
| the top reason on top of my head is that we need to adapt and re configure ourselfs to better suit our lifestyle to the surroundings that we live at right now... why not become a animal hybrid if we can actually live with the earth instead of living aginst it. |
Just because you could (*sigh...*) make an animal hybrid, it doesn't mean that humans are going to live in the environment any better. Ragnarok brough up that social evolution would be more important in this context than genetic evolution. By genetic evolution we're a fairly successful species because we can adapt to the environment. We've got a ways to go though before we catch up to the cockroaches though.
Keep in mind also that just because it's an animal, it doesn't necessarily live in harmony with the environment and other animals that are there. History is littered with issues caused by invasive species.
_________________
"People who are easily offended need to be offended more often."
"Do on to others as you would have others do on to you."
Last edited by Rayadragon on Thu 21 Aug 2008 13:09; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hyraxylos
Shining Dragonstar
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Posts: 805
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
| Posted: Sun 17 Aug 2008 8:42 Post subject: |
|
|
We already have the conscious ability to control and manipulate our own evolution as a species. Simply by default our bodies will change all on their own in response to change in the environment. For example if we exercise a lot and then teach children to exercise a lot and teach them to teach THEIR children to exercise a lot, then that will make the affected population more athletic.
We can strengthen our species in mind as well by teaching each other to be open-minded and question things often. Even supernatural beliefs can be subjected to a process similar to the Scientific Method ("looking within", is I've seen this other version called), and if beliefs pass the test then faith becomes stronger. If beliefs fail the test then they weren't even genuine from the start. Either way there's nothing lost from questioning oneself. We need to quit getting outraged at each other's differences as well (thereby looking for excuses to kill each other), unless it's something that causes direct immediate harm to our livelyhood. Why should I want something illegal that isn't hurting me or anyone important to me?
So basically it all comes down to how humans interact with each other which will determine how we evolve. That's hardly surprising though considering we're social animals. We don't need to use any special tools to tinker with the DNA of individuals; DNA gets tinkered with and experimented upon already by nature, or else there wouldn't be any biodiversity.
_________________
The statement below this one is false.
The statement above this one is true.
This statement is false. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ragnarok
Global Moderator
Joined: 27 Sep 2004
Posts: 1091
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA.
|
| Posted: Sun 17 Aug 2008 14:16 Post subject: |
|
|
It should be noted, however, that you're talking about social evolution, not biological evolution.
_________________
To win against an opponent stronger than yourself, you must not be weaker than that opponent. - Takamachi Nanoha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hyraxylos
Shining Dragonstar
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Posts: 805
Location: Atlanta, GA
|
| Posted: Mon 18 Aug 2008 11:09 Post subject: |
|
|
True, but what other adaptations does our species need to make besides the social category?
_________________
The statement below this one is false.
The statement above this one is true.
This statement is false. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
