Genetic engineering

[Mr Bean]

Uh, how can you boost morality by genetic engineering? And what does it have to do with Superman? Unless you want some really moral people.

Exuse me let me clarfiy, "Guilt" has been identifed, the genes that control people who can't harm a bug or go on bloody mass murders and feel fine was ID back in Sep 99 according to Nationa Medical Jourunal(Or whatever its name is now)

Turn this up and down and you can get somone who will walk through Forrests with Bunnies and songbirds running with them VS the person who walks into a Forest and orders a Nuke Strike to use a Comparison

[neoolong]

Uh, how can you boost morality by genetic engineering? And what does it have to do with Superman? Unless you want some really moral people.

Exuse me let me clarfiy, "Guilt" has been identifed, the genes that control people who can't harm a bug or go on bloody mass murders and feel fine was ID back in Sep 99 according to Nationa Medical Jourunal(Or whatever its name is now)

Turn this up and down and you can get somone who will walk through Forrests with Bunnies and songbirds running with them VS the person who walks into a Forest and orders a Nuke Strike to use a Comparison

Ah. Cool. That's pretty neat.

[haas mark]

SInce everybody seems to like ignoring me today, what is everyone's opinions on GMOs? GMOs are as much part of genetic engineering as "furthering the race."

[neoolong]

SInce everybody seems to like ignoring me today, what is everyone's opinions on GMOs? GMOs are as much part of genetic engineering as "furthering the race."

Uh what does the O part stand for again?

[haas mark]

SInce everybody seems to like ignoring me today, what is everyone's opinions on GMOs? GMOs are as much part of genetic engineering as "furthering the race."

Uh what does the O part stand for again?

Genetically Modified Organisms.....this commonly refers ot genetically modified foods.

[data_link]

SInce everybody seems to like ignoring me today, what is everyone's opinions on GMOs? GMOs are as much part of genetic engineering as "furthering the race."

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to ignore you, I just wasn't paying attention to your posts.

GMO's are great, but given that most foods these days are already GE, I think this issue has already been settled in the affirmative.

[haas mark]

SInce everybody seems to like ignoring me today, what is everyone's opinions on GMOs? GMOs are as much part of genetic engineering as "furthering the race."

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to ignore you, I just wasn't paying attention to your posts.

GMO's are great, but given that most foods these days are already GE, I think this issue has already been settled in the affirmative.

Not my point. And they have not been settled. That is why we have issues with peanut allergies, and such.

[neoolong]

SInce everybody seems to like ignoring me today, what is everyone's opinions on GMOs? GMOs are as much part of genetic engineering as "furthering the race."

Uh what does the O part stand for again?

Genetically Modified Organisms.....this commonly refers ot genetically modified foods.

Ah. Well I think they're okay as long as they are made responsibly. Also, I think that any genes that come from other organisms should be listed. Wouldn't want a tomato with white fish genes given to someone allergic to fish.

[haas mark]

Uh what does the O part stand for again?

Genetically Modified Organisms.....this commonly refers ot genetically modified foods.

Ah. Well I think they're okay as long as they are made responsibly. Also, I think that any genes that come from other organisms should be listed. Wouldn't want a tomato with white fish genes given to someone allergic to fish.

True. But that is my point: a lot of times, people aren't allergic to the foods until they were GMOs to begin with! (Again with the peanut example).

[neoolong]

Yup. Though, it's a slightly academic point. That is the best case and the case that should be tried for.

[HemlockGrey]

Yes!

First megawatt lasers, then genetically altered blue hair...


GUNDAM LIVES!

[Exonerate]

And Purple hair for Misato

[neoolong]

And Purple hair for Misato

Too much Eva for you. Out, Eva obssession, out. Of course while I'm writing this I happen to have Eva on in the background.

[Darth Yoshi]

I think having hot pink hair would be nice. *looks around* What?

Seriously, though. As long as it's properly regulated and monitored, I'm all for genetic engineering.

[Mr Bean]

Screw proper controls Lets bleed as many Bastard Breeds of who knows what!


Just only on the moon not on earth and not before we get a fool-proof self destruct and a horrendsly complicated self destruct as well.

[ViciousMink]

Genetic engineering has great promise for us as a whole. A great deal of problems can be resolved or at least addressed. At the same time, it's the proverbial two-edged sword: it can harm us at least as much as it can help.

The trouble comes up when one realizes that only government regulation can restrict some of the more egregious research, and to what extent the government regulates something is basaed entirely upon what yahoos are in office. Since genetic engineering as a term is really vague and non-specific, it can be expected that governments will be equally non-specific and vague in their controls imposed up research.

The trouble is, governments are restricting research and not use. The potentials are already there, it's not like they'll never see the light of day if we don't research them. And they will; someone, somewhere, even in secret, will discover everything the governments don't want people learning about gengineering. Wether it happens now or later (or far too late to do something about whatever a rogue gengineer comes up with) depends on just how deep into the sand the lawmakers have their heads.

I feel that there are ethical limits to what research should be undertaken, but these are fairly loose, especially compared to the ethical limits to what actual gengineering should be undertaken. Just because we can do a thing does not mean that we must do that thing... but sometimes we have to learn how to do that nebulous 'thing' before we can find the other 'things' which will be of greatest benefit.

Gengineering can hold many horrors, yes. But we won't be able to beat whatever horrors come up, or the riches and rewards beyond, without conducting the research.

P.S. Darth Yoshi, where did you get your avatar from? =)

[Cpt_Frank]

Gengineering can hold many horrors, yes. But we won't be able to beat whatever horrors come up, or the riches and rewards beyond, without conducting the research.

I absolutely concur.

[Nick]

Nevertheless, considering that genetic engineering has been around for millenia, and, as it's THERE, the abuses will happen anyway, we may just as wll reap the benefits and try our level best to curb the atrocities.

Gengineering can hold many horrors, yes. But we won't be able to beat whatever horrors come up, or the riches and rewards beyond, without conducting the research.

Kinda says it all really. . .

[haas mark]

Gengineering can hold many horrors, yes. But we won't be able to beat whatever horrors come up, or the riches and rewards beyond, without conducting the research.

Yes, this is true...

[kojikun]

Anyone ever seen the Nietzscheans from Andromeda? Thats how I think GE should go. We should start modifying ourselves so we can tolerate great heats and colds, so we can breath in noxious fumes and merely go "mm smells nice", so we can withstand extreme gravity, or none at all, with no side effects, increase intelligence, stamina, lifespan, fertility, immune systems, everything.

But this must be coupled with a good education and such. We dont need uberFundies, only uberScientists. :p

[Gil Hamilton]

Ah. Well I think they're okay as long as they are made responsibly. Also, I think that any genes that come from other organisms should be listed. Wouldn't want a tomato with white fish genes given to someone allergic to fish.

This doesn't make much sense to me. People who are allegic to fish aren't allergic to everything in fish, just particular chemicals produced by fish biology. A specific gene, just because it comes from a fish, would not effect a person who's allergic to fish, unless the particular gene's purpose is growing structures that produce that chemical that the person with fish allergies can't have in the first place. I remember reading about those tomatos with fish genes. They are taken from flounders and help make the organism with them more resistant to freezing. This wouldn't effect a person with fish allergies. After all, it's just one genegroup.

[neoolong]

Ah. Well I think they're okay as long as they are made responsibly. Also, I think that any genes that come from other organisms should be listed. Wouldn't want a tomato with white fish genes given to someone allergic to fish.

This doesn't make much sense to me. People who are allegic to fish aren't allergic to everything in fish, just particular chemicals produced by fish biology. A specific gene, just because it comes from a fish, would not effect a person who's allergic to fish, unless the particular gene's purpose is growing structures that produce that chemical that the person with fish allergies can't have in the first place. I remember reading about those tomatos with fish genes. They are taken from flounders and help make the organism with them more resistant to freezing. This wouldn't effect a person with fish allergies. After all, it's just one genegroup.

Yes, but how are you going to test what exactly in the fish makes the exact person allergic. It is much more logical to just tell the person they may get sick and so to avoid it. I know they aren't allergic to everything, but if you don't warn them exactly what parts are in, they may still get sick.

[Gil Hamilton]

Yes, but how are you going to test what exactly in the fish makes the exact person allergic. It is much more logical to just tell the person they may get sick and so to avoid it. I know they aren't allergic to everything, but if you don't warn them exactly what parts are in, they may still get sick.

Do scratch tests with the tomato. This will easily determine whether the tomato is dangerous. Considering that they've done this repeatedly before they were even close to grocery shelves, you'd think if it could make people sick, testing would show it by now. Telling people that it might make them sick when there is no allergens in the tomato that it will actually make them sick is more than a little silly.
Most people who are worried about genetically engineered foods, despite the rigorous testing the FDA puts them through, are the same types of people who think that power lines cause cancer.

[neoolong]

Yes, but how are you going to test what exactly in the fish makes the exact person allergic. It is much more logical to just tell the person they may get sick and so to avoid it. I know they aren't allergic to everything, but if you don't warn them exactly what parts are in, they may still get sick.

Do scratch tests with the tomato. This will easily determine whether the tomato is dangerous. Considering that they've done this repeatedly before they were even close to grocery shelves, you'd think if it could make people sick, testing would show it by now. Telling people that it might make them sick when there is no allergens in the tomato that it will actually make them sick is more than a little silly.
Most people who are worried about genetically engineered foods, despite the rigorous testing the FDA puts them through, are the same types of people who think that power lines cause cancer.

What exactly are scratch tests? And is it only a small number of things in fish that potentially cause allergic reactions? Can it be that something will not cause an allergic reaction in one person that is allergic to fish and yet someone will be affected?

[Gil Hamilton]

What exactly are scratch tests? And is it only a small number of things in fish that potentially cause allergic reactions? Can it be that something will not cause an allergic reaction in one person that is allergic to fish and yet someone will be affected?

Haven't you every had a scratch test? I thought that is something that everyone takes some time in their life.
The basic idea is simple. You have a person who you are testing to see whether something is an allergen. A person is given a small scratch and the substance that they are testing is applied to the scratch. If they are allergic to the substance, there will be a reaction beyond any normal reaction to the substance.
In the case of a genetically engineered tomato triggering fish allergies, it would be simple. The FDA holds a cattle call for people who are known to have allergic reactions to fish. Three scratch tests are given. The first is the whitefish that they got the specific gene from to confirm that they are allergic to the fish. The second is an ordinary home grown tomato, to confirm that they are not allergic to tomatoes, too. Then they do a scratch test with the altered tomato. Since the gene-spliced tomato is identical to the ordinary tomato except for the gene and it's resultant structure, if they test the same, then the anti-freezing gene doesn't produce allergens.
Note that the FDA requires all foods and drugs it has tested to publish every single reaction during testing. Every single one. If only one person has a problem during clinical, even if the problem has absolutely nothing to do with the product, they food or drug companies are legally required to print it on the packaging and commercials of the product. Ever seen those commercials for drugs where they say "Side effects may include..." then list a string of medical problems? Say, nausea. It's because some people during the clinic trials reported that they were nauseous that day, which many times has nothing to do with the product. The fact that gene-spliced tomatoes don't have warnings for people with fish allergies and they they've been through clinical trials is proof that a connection doesn't exist, since many, many heads would roll if they failed to report and label the connection.