# British researchers create human-animal hybrid embryo amid political row



## Yrys (3 Apr 2008)

British researchers create human-animal hybrid embryo amid political row



> LONDON (AFP) - For the first time in Britain, researchers at Newcastle University said Tuesday they had created human-animal hybrid embryos, amid
> a political row over a disputed embryo research bill in parliament.
> 
> According to the northern English university, the research, which was first presented at a lecture in Tel Aviv on March 25, has yet to be published or verified, with
> ...



Link

I wonder if that thing, allowing human-animal hybrid embryo to be created , is one of those where the limits will be pushed , from 14 days to , say, a few months.


Abortion have now different time limit, depending of country. There was a French program, some weeks ago, about a country in Europe where women
get an "abortion" at 32 weeks.


----------



## CougarKing (3 Apr 2008)

This reminds me of the movie called "The Island of Dr. Moreau". If they experiment further than this, who knows what monstrousities they can come up with?    :


----------



## Yrys (3 Apr 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> This reminds me of the movie called "The Island of Dr. Moreau". If they experiment further than this, who knows what monstrousities they can come up with?    :



It reminds me of it too, except that we"re not in a movie, we can't predict what could come out of it. The ones in the book and movie were not that bad
compare to what reality may hold in the future ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Apr 2008)

I just finished this book titled "Next" by Michael Crichton.  He claims to use a blend of fact and fiction as usual to make a story that covers this subject and the whole gene issue.  It was interesting and entertaining and does make one wonder at what sort of experiments are being tried out there.

http://www.michaelcrichton.net/books-next-history.html


----------



## Old Sweat (3 Apr 2008)

At the risk of being cynical, I wonder what the significance of the article being published on 1 April is.

Edit: Or is it all an odd coincidence?


----------



## Yrys (3 Apr 2008)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> At the risk of being cynical, I wonder what the significance of the article being published on 1 April is.
> 
> Edit: Or is it all an odd coincidence?



It seems to be a coincidence. Their website : The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority :



> The Authority made a decision about the policy for licensing of human-animal hybrid research at its open Authority meeting of 5 September.


----------



## LCIS-Tech (3 Apr 2008)

Oh for god sakes guys! The article was posted on 1 April   "April Fool's"!!!! Gotcha!!!


----------



## Yrys (3 Apr 2008)

LCIS-Tech said:
			
		

> Oh for god sakes guys! The article was posted on 1 April   "April Fool's"!!!! Gotcha!!!



Did you go to their web site ? It is too elaborate for an April Fool's. They were mostly single press release (April Fool's).
If one has been "punk" here, it may be you, into thinking it's not truth.

Not 4 press releases, longs reports ( Hybrids Policy -Final  Report (895 Kb) and Hybrids and Chimeras (888 Kb) ) , 5 audio files, videos post on youtube for "Public dialogue", and papers on the process of the consultation ...

Their website : The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority :



> Hybrids and Chimeras
> 
> * Authority decision
> * About the Consultation
> ...


----------



## Old Sweat (3 Apr 2008)

Yrys

You may be correct, but consider:

a. the Brits often spend a lot of time and effort on creating elaborate April's Fool stories, for example the flying penguins; and

b. if this was a legitimate story, the mass media would have been all over it like a dirty shirt.

Let's see what happens.


----------



## Yrys (3 Apr 2008)

Old Sweat,

Before thinking it's a prank, I will wait for a debunk statement.

a) Yes, for people that aren't suppose to have sense of humour (they are repute for their rigide stand), they do spend a lot of time into prank.

b) What media may or may not pick is someitmes a mystery to me. Example : in the French media, they're all over the statement of Mr. Paul Watson, activist. 
He said that the slaughter of young seals is a greater tragedy then the deaths of the hunters.I had some difficulty into finding the same subject in English, even
he's an anglophone working for what seems to be an anglophone organisation (Sea Shepherd Conservation Society).


1) Press release of 11-01-2007 was report in others media (http://www.gene.ch/genet/2007/Jan/msg00043.html) ,  blog (http://lawnscience.blogspot.com/2007/01/comments-requested-on-human-animal.html) , and parliement web site ( http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmsctech/272/27207.htm )

2) Press release of   26-04-2007 was also report : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6978384.stm

3) Press release of 05-09-2007 was reflected upon in an organisation that has stakes in the think : Muscular dystrophy ( http://www.muscular-dystrophy.org/research/research_news/hfea_reaches.html)

4) Press release of 09-01-2008 was report on a scientific web site : Science Daily ( http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080118102223.htm )


Still think it's a prank ? Don't you think that a year preparation with such collaboration and no one whistling the whistle is a bit much ?

I'm sorry, but it's real. I don't know if I approve of it or not, didn't read all the informations. *But I don't like it a bit*. And I'm not sure why, but it disgust me.


----------



## Old Sweat (3 Apr 2008)

You have convinced me. Good job!

I am not conflicted about this. I also don't like it one little bit. Cloning or inserting/manipulating genes to fight disease is one thing; screwing with life is another.


----------



## TCBF (3 Apr 2008)

- On the plus side, this could solve our recruiting problems.

"C'mon youse animals - ya wanna live forever?"


----------



## Yrys (3 Apr 2008)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> You have convinced me. Good job!



Thank you. Alto  I would have prefer a prank, you know.



			
				Old Sweat said:
			
		

> I am not conflicted about this. I also don't like it one little bit. Cloning or inserting/manipulating genes to fight disease is one thing; screwing with life is another.



I'm not conflict about it either. I just don't know what they are doing, and not interested at the moment to read what is it, it is disgusting me to much. I just don't know
if I am for it or not as I don't know what are theirs hopes for use in sickness. (Eating head of dead cows disgust me, but I don't care much) I see too many potentials of sliding it in. For me, they're not screwing with life yet, but screwing with what is a human being.

I could almost see it in the beginning of an horror flick : pictures of news papers article with a voice over saying that it was the beginning of the end, 
but they (humans) didn't see it .


TCBF,

We forget it in the day-to-day, but we are animals  ...



> Humans, or human beings, are bipedal primates belonging to the mammalian species Homo sapiens (Latin: "wise man" or "knowing man") in the family Hominidae (the great apes)



We are in the family of "apes"...


----------



## Fusaki (3 Apr 2008)

I've always looked at this gene-manipulation stuff as one of those "pandora's box" situations.

Now that this has been discovered, it cannot be undiscovered.  As hard as some might try to ban science like this, there is no way of stopping it.  If we're not doing it then someone else will be.

It's dangerous to try and put this away and pretend like it never happened.  What happens if some other country with fewer moral scruples finds a way to weaponize this technology?  Biological weapons are just the tip of the iceberg, I think.  I also believe that this kind of bio-technology will have a similar effect as nuclear technology has - helping to shape the world's  balance of power.

The question should not be "How are we going to stop this?" It should be "How do we use this to our advantage?"


----------



## TCBF (3 Apr 2008)

Wonderbread said:
			
		

> The question should not be "How are we going to stop this?" It should be "How do we use this to our advantage?"



- Now, you've got me thinking: I think we should consider a military point of view.  Suppose the Russkies stashed away a couple of big 'monster' labs underground to work on this 'monster' stuff.  They could be way ahead of us already. It would be idiotic of us not to stash away a couple of underground monster labs of our own.

- We must not allow a 'monster lab' gap!

(With apologies to "Dr. Strangelove")

 ;D


----------



## Celticgirl (3 Apr 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> This reminds me of the movie called "The Island of Dr. Moreau". If they experiment further than this, who knows what monstrousities they can come up with?    :



I was going to say the same thing, although I would have said "the novel" instead of "the movie".


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Apr 2008)

Now, I have to wonder. What if a couple of people were dead set against gene and embryo research and manipulation. What if the researchers found something extrordinary and useful. What if those two people were parents that tried forever to have a child and were finally blessed with one. What if that child took fataly ill and the only way to save it was with the new experimental treatment.

I wonder how many parents would change their tune, instead of taking the chance of losing the only child they can have?

The world is full of righteous indignation and condemnation of others and their ideas.

Until it becomes personal.

It would be a no brainer for me.

Just a 'what if' thought.


----------



## Miniskirt (7 Apr 2008)

Good point Recceguy, well made.

Firstly, may I say that it is very interesting to read all your opinions on this issue.

Secondly, Yrys, with reference to your statement…


			
				Yrys said:
			
		

> a) Yes, for people that aren't suppose to have sense of humour (they are repute for their rigide stand), they do spend a lot of time into prank.



British people actually have excellent senses of humour – just very different to your own, perhaps, some might say, on a more sophisticated level?

Also, the 14-day limit will not be extended because that is the point at which the primitive steak begins to develop and it is agreed by the stem cell community that ALL embryos used in research must be destroyed.  No scientist has ever expressed a desire to continue cultivating embryonic stem cells past this stage.

So before your imaginations run wild, conjuring up images of hybrids like Minotaur and other such mythical creatures or ‘monsters’, you may like to know some things about cytoplasmic hybrid (human-animal) embryos…  They are being created because there simply aren’t enough human eggs available to create embryos for research purposes - there aren’t even enough to satisfy the huge waiting lists for egg donations used in IVF!

Cytoplasmic hybrid embryos are created through the transfer of human genetic material into animal ova by cell nuclear replacement. The nucleus of an adult cell (usually a skin cell) is implanted in to an enucleated animal egg (original nucleus has been extracted).  Consequently all nuclear animal DNA is removed, but the mitochondrial DNA present in the animal egg remains, though this amounts to LESS THAN 1% of the total DNA – the embryos is over 99% human, the animal egg is just a shell in a way.

Finally, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority is regarded by medical professionals as one of the best regulatory systems in the world, “able to balance scientific development and ethical issues with confidence and vision” and “provide a permissive, but strictly regulated environment” - Professor Hui Sheng (of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine, China)

I hope this has helped you understand a little more so you can make a more informed opinion of this type of research


----------



## Fusaki (7 Apr 2008)

> Also, the 14-day limit will not be extended because that is the point at which the primitive steak begins to develop and it is agreed by the stem cell community that ALL embryos used in research must be destroyed.  No scientist has ever expressed a desire to continue cultivating embryonic stem cells past this stage.



I'm not worried about the good guys making Minotaurs.  Its the mad scientists that scare me.

Thanks for the post though. I've learned something new today. ;D


----------



## Adrian_888 (7 Apr 2008)

Wonderbread said:
			
		

> Now that this has been discovered, it cannot be undiscovered.  As hard as some might try to ban science like this, there is no way of stopping it.  If we're not doing it then someone else will be.
> 
> It's dangerous to try and put this away and pretend like it never happened.  What happens if some other country with fewer moral scruples finds a way to weaponize this technology?  Biological weapons are just the tip of the iceberg, I think.  I also believe that this kind of bio-technology will have a similar effect as nuclear technology has - helping to shape the world's  balance of power.



You know i'm pretty sure Iran has these embryonic weapons, we should probably invade them.  We must stop the terrorist from obtaining these weapons of mass unethicalness!


----------

