Thread: Ask Me About Genetic Engineering

I'll have a crack. What are the real dangers of genetic engineering, and what are the most common misconceptions?

Is Monsanto out to get us all, or are they just money-hogging capitalists?

I'm very pro-GE, but don't like those who are trying to extort farmers by taking advantage of the patent system.

Originally Posted by khh

I'll have a crack. What are the real dangers of genetic engineering, and what are the most common misconceptions?

Perhaps the largest danger is "genetic pollution," wherein a gene not normally found in nature rapidly hybridizes with other species of plant, sometimes for the better, but usually for the worst. For example, a type of herbicide-resistant plant may cross with a weed, and lead to a new breed of weeds immune to that certain herbicide. The other major problem would be unintended consequences. Say a new form of potatoes is grown to be resistant to a particular type of microbe, and so the microbial population diminishes. Well, say these microbes are vital for cloud formation. Now that fewer of these exist, there are less clouds, and havoc ensues. Not the best examples, but you get the idea. I guess if you really wanted to go all-out extreme, it would be possible to reverse-engineer a new strain of smallpox from a bit of common ebola, which is rather scary, but quite unlikely to happen.

As for common misconceptions, you hear all the time about "frankentaters" and "fishy tomatoes" and the like, often depicted with cartoons like this:

Such claims and pictures promote entirely the wrong idea. While it is true that some tomatoes contain genes from a flounder, the fear mongers have us believe, at some level, that fish flesh is actually being produced within the tomato, which is simply untrue.

Originally Posted by Odd_Nonposter

Is Monsanto out to get us all, or are they just money-hogging capitalists?

I'm very pro-GE, but don't like those who are trying to extort farmers by taking advantage of the patent system.

I haven't done much digging into the economic side of things, but I would guess they're greedy bastards more than anything else. I agree, it is ridiculous how they abuse the patent system, and something about that must be changed in the near future.

Originally Posted by Mario92

The other major problem would be unintended consequences.

Isn't it possible that some unintended side effect could cause adverse reactions in humans?

Originally Posted by Mario92

I haven't done much digging into the economic side of things, but I would guess they're greedy bastards more than anything else. I agree, it is ridiculous how they abuse the patent system, and something about that must be changed in the near future.

But then again, without the greedy bastards, who will finance the research? There's a reason we have a patent system.

Originally Posted by khh

Isn't it possible that some unintended side effect could cause adverse reactions in humans?

Yes, this is very true. Superweeds would make farming difficult, for one thing. As for direct adverse health effects, you would have to be working with anthrax or something, I think. Genetic pollution on its own should not have any adverse side effects, and GE crops are completely safe (at least, the modern ones are). Mostly. The ones intended for consumption are.

But then again, without the greedy bastards, who will finance the research? There's a reason we have a patent system.

Yes, patents can be very good and are essential, but the way the GE industry abuses them is sickening. You can patent individual genes nowadays, which is simply ludicrous. By now, half the genes in your body probably belong to GE companies.

Are catgirls possible to be made with genetic engineering?

Originally Posted by Mario92

Yes, this is very true. Superweeds would make farming difficult, for one thing. As for direct adverse health effects, you would have to be working with anthrax or something, I think. Genetic pollution on its own should not have any adverse side effects, and GE crops are completely safe (at least, the modern ones are). Mostly. The ones intended for consumption are.

Actually, I was kinda baiting you with that one. I believe I've read about a product which actually did cause direct adverse health effects when on prolonged consumption. I can try to dig up the article tomorrow.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Yes, patents can be very good and are essential, but the way the GE industry abuses them is sickening. You can patent individual genes nowadays, which is simply ludicrous. By now, half the genes in your body probably belong to GE companies.

Yes, I agree, that's simply stupid. Also, I don't really know what abuses they are committing. Care to enlighten me?

Originally Posted by slayer

Are catgirls possible to be made with genetic engineering?

Technically speaking...maybe. At present, the technology is too imprecise to make a living catgirl, though further research would improve it to the point that living, breathing catgirls could indeed be created. Getting the required clearance, however, would be an entirely different matter. Somehow, I don't think our society is quite ready to accept catgirls...

However, if gene therapy is ever perfected (the process of modifying one's genetic material after birth), and if people could make a conscious decision to become catgirls, society may be more willing.

Originally Posted by khh

Actually, I was kinda baiting you with that one. I believe I've read about a product which actually did cause direct adverse health effects when on prolonged consumption. I can try to dig up the article tomorrow.

Sneaky bastard...hehe, the crops in question are most likely BT crops, which are engineered with a *supposedly* human-safe pesticide. There is no doubt that much further research and testing will need to take place, but I think GE crops hold much potential.

Yes, I agree, that's simply stupid. Also, I don't really know what abuses they are committing. Care to enlighten me?

Well, by patenting genes, they pretty much declare all research on that gene off-limits. People aren't allowed to mess with it, use it, anything, which brings research to a screeching halt. Shame, really, when so much is left to be done in the field. The process needs to be made faster and more efficient, and if other companies were allowed to work with the same genes, the prices of GE crops would be driven down, which would be a welcome relief to farmers.

Originally Posted by Mario92

However, if gene therapy is ever perfected (the process of modifying one's genetic material after birth), and if people could make a conscious decision to become catgirls, society may be more willing.

I think that's too big a change to make after someone is old enough to make that decision. And hopefully no-one will ever feel compelled to do something like that to a baby.

Originally Posted by Mario92

Sneaky bastard...hehe, the crops in question are most likely BT crops, which are engineered with a *supposedly* human-safe pesticide. There is no doubt that much further research and testing will need to take place, but I think GE crops hold much potential.

Yes, I agree. There is much potential in GE crops. Also, it's pretty much our only option, isn't it, if our population doesn't stop growing.

Originally Posted by khh

I think that's too big a change to make after someone is old enough to make that decision. And hopefully no-one will ever feel compelled to do something like that to a baby.

That's the reason why they would need people who can make decisions like that though...

There would be a huge controversy if scientists used a woman to carry a baby with genetic engineering that didn't have a choice to become whatever it's becoming.

Originally Posted by Mario92

I don't think our society is quite ready to accept catgirls...

Screw society I want my catgirls!

Originally Posted by khh

I think that's too big a change to make after someone is old enough to make that decision. And hopefully no-one will ever feel compelled to do something like that to a baby.

Yes, it would be a radical change, and is many years away from becoming reality, but if we could just perfect gene therapy...and I do mean perfect. About a .001% chance of error, here.

Originally Posted by slayer

Screw society I want my catgirls!

lol. I might have to sig that...

Originally Posted by Mario92

Yes, it would be a radical change, and is many years away from becoming reality, but if we could just perfect gene therapy...and I do mean perfect. About a .001% chance of error, here.

I believe it is so big a change that it would be impossible, even if we managed to perfect gene therapy.

Originally Posted by khh

I believe it is so big a change that it would be impossible, even if we managed to perfect gene therapy.

Hmm...you may be correct. But what if we could reverse aging? Think about it...aging is gene-controlled, along with all other body processes. Not sure if this is even possible, but kinda interesting to think about.

Mario, if genetic engineers did find a way to stop or reverse aging, wouldn't the population eventually grow out of control? Even at the current exponential growth rate of human populations, we will at some point run into problems associated with the carrying capacity of our environment. A reversal of aging would bring us to that point much more quickly, at least in first-world countries where the technology would be readily available, would it not?

Originally Posted by KingCarnie

Mario, if genetic engineers did find a way to stop or reverse aging, wouldn't the population eventually grow out of control? Even at the current exponential growth rate of human populations, we will at some point run into problems associated with the carrying capacity of our environment. A reversal of aging would bring us to that point much more quickly, at least in first-world countries where the technology would be readily available, would it not?

It would certainty stop old people from dieing...

But there are others ways of dieing besides age.

I wonder if it's possible to genetically engineer someone so they don't have to breathe oxygen to live...

Originally Posted by KingCarnie

Mario, if genetic engineers did find a way to stop or reverse aging, wouldn't the population eventually grow out of control? Even at the current exponential growth rate of human populations, we will at some point run into problems associated with the carrying capacity of our environment. A reversal of aging would bring us to that point much more quickly, at least in first-world countries where the technology would be readily available, would it not?

I said interesting, not "good idea." Yes, that would probably be a not-good thing, but on the flip side, what if you made it so humans could only become pregnant on very rare occasions? 20 years is a long time, but eternity is longer still. Again, not advocating it, but still an interesting thought...

Originally Posted by slayer

It would certainty stop old people from dieing...

But there are others ways of dieing besides age.

I wonder if it's possible to genetically engineer someone so they don't have to breathe oxygen to live...

Yes, there are numerous ways to die.
As for your second question, I think it may be possible, but is rather unlikely. Pretty much, complex life revolves around a need for oxygen. Though, if you found a way to make life work with nitrogen...

Originally Posted by KingCarnie

Mario, if genetic engineers did find a way to stop or reverse aging, wouldn't the population eventually grow out of control? Even at the current exponential growth rate of human populations, we will at some point run into problems associated with the carrying capacity of our environment. A reversal of aging would bring us to that point much more quickly, at least in first-world countries where the technology would be readily available, would it not?

If anything, a rising population should be a motivator to expand beyond the meager boundaries of our little blue planet. The government officials will finally get off their asses and look into subjects like terraforming, building orbital space colonies, or simply improving upon long-existing ideas (tower-based communities [see "Millenium Tower"], underwater domes, etc.). Nothing motivates like a kick in the rear, right?

@Mario: Is there any evidence - or do you personally deem it likely - that GE has been (or will be) used to build "super soldiers" for the military? What do you think the consequences would be if two warring nations perfected such super soldiers, and pitted them against each other on the battlefield?

Originally Posted by Lëzen

@Mario: Is there any evidence - or do you personally deem it likely - that GE has been (or will be) used to build "super soldiers" for the military? What do you think the consequences would be if two warring nations perfected such super soldiers, and pitted them against each other on the battlefield?

I hope they put up some HD cameras because I would want to see 2 super soldiers go up against each other...

Originally Posted by Lëzen

@Mario: Is there any evidence - or do you personally deem it likely - that GE has been (or will be) used to build "super soldiers" for the military? What do you think the consequences would be if two warring nations perfected such super soldiers, and pitted them against each other on the battlefield?

If the government is working on such a project, they're keeping it a damn good secret. Well, in theory, the human body has its limitations, but if the right genes were altered or changed, it would be possible to increase these limitations significantly. Eugenics as we know it is a relatively new technology, though, and I cannot quite see it being applied to the creation of super soldiers, at least not in the state we know it as. Someday soon, though, this could be very possible.

Originally Posted by slayer

I hope they put up some HD cameras because I would want to see 2 super soldiers go up against each other...

Yes.

In theory, is it possible to replace every cell in an organism with cells containing a desired trait, such as a cure for Down's?

Originally Posted by mini0991

In theory, is it possible to replace every cell in an organism with cells containing a desired trait, such as a cure for Down's?

That is called Gene Therapy, and research is being done on it. Because of current limitations, it is proving to be rather difficult to pull off, though some small-scale applications have proven successful. Defective retinal cells in some dogs have been replaced with functioning ones via gene therapy, and this is a science with great potential. Unfortunately, it is proving troublesome to get it to take throughout the entire body, as the most common means of introducing the good genes are imprecise and may cause more harm than good.

In terms of preventing certain detrimental or fatal genetic diseases, eugenics is proving to be more promising in the long run. This is when an embryo, only a cell or two big, is genetically modified to have certain desirable traits, ranging from genetic immunity to trivial appearances. It will be something to watch closely in the coming years.

Originally Posted by Mario92

This is when an embryo, only a cell or two big, is genetically modified to have certain desirable traits, ranging from genetic immunity to trivial appearances. It will be something to watch closely in the coming years.

Years ago, i read in a book that by 2020 people will be able to have "designer babies". Do you think that within the next 10 years that people will be able to commercially "buy" designer babies i.e. modified embryos or whatever? I know it's a dumb question, but do you think that prediction i read about was accurate?

Also, apologies for resurrecting this thread to those who may object.

Originally Posted by Soros

Years ago, i read in a book that by 2020 people will be able to have "designer babies". Do you think that within the next 10 years that people will be able to commercially "buy" designer babies i.e. modified embryos or whatever? I know it's a dumb question, but do you think that prediction i read about was accurate?

Also, apologies for resurrecting this thread to those who may object.

Necro-post forgiven.

Yes, physical traits can be genetically selected. Some view this as giving your baby the best possible chance, while others think of it as taking away genetic diversity and edging closer to a race of nearly-identical humans without individuality. The technology is available...as long as society/the government does not ban such practices, it may very well become commercially available.

Haven't we been genetically engineering for years? I mean, carrots were white untill farmers tapped their stalk to that of another plant.