Scientists debate creation of animal/human hybrids

[Edwin]

Island of Dr. Moreau, anyone?

Link:
Click Here (http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/nation/10274775.htm)

[RepTylE]

Anyone who didn't see this coming please raise your hands. I will leave everyeone to draw their own conclusions but as time goes by we all are desensitized to the issue as genewarping moves along.
One day things will come to a head since wishy washy politicians bow to lobbyists for the companies that are funding this research and they fund it in order to make money later. Left to their own devices they will come out with designer animals, recreate extinct animals and god knows what else.
Already there is beginnings of debate on how human is human. The answers that they arrive at will set the precident for future developments.

[Ptindy]

Wow, that is a truly amazing discovery. This could lead to very benefial discoveries that will help human kind in many ways. On the contrary, this could also help us burn ourselves. Sure all the research these scientists are doing NOW is good and beneficial, but what about when it gets to a greater scale. We'll be making killer pigs or something stupid like that. If they can create a limit as to which we can use this science for then I see no problem with it, but honestly we can't. Anyone with the knowledge can do their own little experiment and make it evil if they wanted. We started off with dynamite which was beneficial in ways, now through further studies we can make weapons that can annihilate everyone on a continent. What will science like this lead us to 50 years down the road. Honestly, I'm afraid to know.

Mike

[mudflats]

All i can do is shake my head. Sure this may be neat, but god did not intend for us to do this. Why can't we just be happy with whats on this earth instead of trying to play mother nature. In my opinion i think this is going to be another Einstein moment. In the end they are going to wish they never created or fooled with stuff like this.

[LISA127]

Being a person of faith, I have a big problem with issues like this. I agree with mudflats completely. Let's not play God.

[clint545]

I agree with mudflats, don't we have enough interesting animals as it is? didn't they just release a study this week where they've documented thousands of new species in the oceans?

[Steve]

this is not natural. Humans should not ne playing 'god'. I think we should leave nature as it is.

[Will]

Fascinating...

Potentially scary, but fascinating...

[marisa]

Maybe we shouldn't be playing God but it's hard to tell someone that who is waiting for an organ because the lists are so long now.

If they can use this to "grow" better and easier to accept organs in qauntity so people won't die waiting, it's hard to deny a human that.

Marisa

[Nicky]

Marisa you make a very good point, I guess theres really no right answer theres so many good and bad points I just hope they draw the line some where along the road befor it gets out of hand. Personally i don't think we should be playing God but it seems to be a very popular trend among our species.

[hhw]

Well, I for one am all for freedom of religion. However, what I detest is one religion infringing on the rights of others. If you believe certain things, practice them in your own lives without forcing them onto others. A democracy is supposed to be about balancing the rights of an individual with those of a society as a whole.

It angers me that abortion and same sex marriages are even issues in a modern society. How would you like it if people who were pro-choice were telling you you HAD to get an abortion? Or what if same-sex couples told you that since they didn't believe in marriage between a man and a wife, you shouldn't be allowed to be married either? Do what you want in your own lives, don't tell other people what to do in theirs when it doesn't affect you beyond your simply not liking the idea of it. Clearly, the religious beliefs of some are infringing on the rights of others in these issues.

Now, there are many valid reasons to oppose these so-called chimaeras. Religion should not be one of them. Ban this type of research in your own religion and prevent others in your own religion from using the medical benefits of this research all you want. Just don't be telling other people not to, just as nobody would be forcing this research upon you.

[sneaky_boa]

In my lab we just came across a paper where human neural stem cell progenitors were successfully placed in a mongolian gerbil brain (yes, it sounds unbelievable) and were completely viable (and repaired motor defecits caused by an imposed lesion). Incredible.....human animal hybrids are already happening in labs across Canada and especially in Japan. Don't think it hasn't happened, because believe me it already has!

[CamHanna]

Originally posted by Ptindy
We'll be making killer pigs or something stupid like that.
Why would we make killer pigs? With legislation as controlling as it is, and the public as scrutinizing, I can't see this type of technology being widely abused, especially for the purpose of "making killer pigs or something stupid like that".
Originally posted by Ptindy
We started off with dynamite which was beneficial in ways, now through further studies we can make weapons that can annihilate everyone on a continent.
Do you actually think it society would be better off without knowledge of explosives? As potentially damaging the technology is I believe that our modern mining, combustion engines and other technology justify any risks. Even fire is an explosive technology but is absolutely essential to human existence. Perhaps one day we will think the same of this "truly amazing discovery". Additionally, it is true that we can "annihilate everyone on a continent", but this has never happened and I doubt that it will in any time soon. I could tromp up the stairs right now and cut some throats with a very simple technology, do you think I will?
Originally posted by mudflats
god did not intend for us to do this
Did God tell you that? I am not religious and honestly do not care what ‘God’ thinks; nor do 3 500 000 000 other people. I do not believe that religion has a place in scientific debate and will comment on it no further.
Originally posted by mudflats
In my opinion i think this is going to be another Einstein moment
Now what could you possibly have against Einstein? And what is an "Einstein moment"?
Originally posted by clint545
don't we have enough interesting animals as it is
Perhaps you should visit a hybrid debate. The purpose of this technology is not so much to amuse ourselves with pig-people as it is to grow replacement parts for people, create resilient crops to feed people and grow insulin to keep people alive. Insulin has been produced by bacteria combined with human genes since 1982. Most insulin now comes from these 'chimera' bacteria.

Originally posted by sneaky boa
human neural stem cell progenitors were successfully placed in a mongolian gerbil brain... and were completely viable (and repaired motor defecits caused by an imposed lesion).
See? See? It's a good thing!

Cam

[Ptindy]

Well Cam, the killer pigs was a joke in a way. I just had a mental image of these pigs all in ranks marching with guns. I dunno lol. It was far fetched and I know it would never happened, I just said it for the hell of it, don't take it literally.

As for the explosive issue, I think it's great. Just like I think that being able to make livers for those in need is great. But humans tend to do more then they have to in these regards and end up creating something that could potentially destroy us. I didn't say explosives were bad in away way, but the degree to which we have done it is bad. I could see something bad coming from giving animals human like qualities. I dunno. I hate these opinion posts as everyone has a different point of view, I know, but then also, everyone has a different point of view on your view and things never come across right.

Mike

[CamHanna]

Originally posted by Ptindy
everyone has a different point of view on your view and things never come across right
It's true. And I figured you were kidding about the killer pigs but I'm PO'ed about homework and felt like arguing. No offence of course.

Cam

[RepTylE]

I think that the inclusion of human DNA is the issue. I am not concerned with the religious aspect in the least.

"But with no federal guidelines in place, an awkward question hovers above the work: How human must a chimera be before more stringent research rules should kick in? "

"But chimerism becomes a more sensitive topic when it involves growing entire human organs inside animals. And it becomes especially sensitive when it deals in brain cells, the building blocks of the organ credited with making humans human."

That is what the ethical debate should be about. In that article there are scenarios that are alarming. Mankind has a long history of doing things not because they should but because they can.
Brand new diseases could form from these chimeras and we have had enough viral suprises in recent decades as well. There is more to this than religious stands, miracle cures and organ transplants. There is still room in the modern world for ethics no matter what people tell you.

[noname]

Wow, new developments in science, such as this, astound me! This could be beneficial to the human population, however, it's all a matter of opinion. If we say putting human stem cells in the brains of gerbils is "playing God", couldn't we also say that finding cures for diseases is also in a sense, playing God? I'm definitely not choosing sides here, as I don't even know what my opinion is on this issue. Just playing devil's advocate, I suppose.

Do you actually think it society would be better off without knowledge of explosives? As potentially damaging the technology is I believe that our modern mining, combustion engines and other technology justify any risks. Even fire is an explosive technology but is absolutely essential to human existence. Perhaps one day we will think the same of this "truly amazing discovery". Additionally, it is true that we can "annihilate everyone on a continent", but this has never happened and I doubt that it will in any time soon. I could tromp up the stairs right now and cut some throats with a very simple technology, do you think I will?

Of course technology wouldn't be better off without the knowledge of explosives - I don't think that's what Ptindy was saying at all. I think he's just saying that with advances in technology, as incredible as they are today, we have to be careful with the amount of power we have. I don't know about you, but the fact that these "weapons of mass distruction" even exist in the first place, scares the **** out of me...the fact that you doubt that they will be used any time soon, doesn't offer much comfort. No, I don't think that you will suddenly decide to cut some throats, but the fact that there is currently a discussion about whether implanting a human embryo into the womb of an animal is ethical, is proof enough that this can, and likely will get out of hand.

Court

[Slannesh]

The god aspect can be argued in a myriad of ways... if god didn't intend for humans to 'play god' like this, then why give us the capability to do so in the first place?

Beyond pointing that out i'm going to keep quiet on that aspect of this discussion because it's probably a violation of the TOS, if so i'll apologize to the mods now :) Please don't kill me :)

Stem cell research is important, but the harsh reality is you don't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. Science, especially biological type research is rarely pretty.

People don't want to die, or suffer. I think noname had a really good point about where some people draw the line. To paraphrase, "Curing cancer? That's good, Growing human organs in animals? that's bad!" Why is that? How is one goal any less noble or 'right' than the other? By definition medicine in any form is 'playing god' you're changing the rules of biology by curing disease or repairing damage that the body couldn't heal on it's own.

Humans have either evolved or were created with an innate curiosity about the world we live in and the capacity to do something about it, that's the reason we're at the top of the food chain really.

The potential abuses that could come of such research is pretty scary i'll agree, but there are also some pretty strict rules about what you're allowed to do in such research as well. If it helps the quality of life of people waiting for organ transplants and such i'm all for it.

Mutant armies of tiger-men bent on subjugation of homo sapiens i'm not so keen on :)

[Siretsap]

Actually it isn'T true that the goverment invests a lot of money in this. I know that Bush is agains't it, which is why the real Superman (Christopher Reeve) wanted to sue the goverment from blocking the studies to those sort of tests which could have made him walk again. Also, Michael J. Fox also mentioned similar criticism agains't Bush concerning blocked studies of the same sort to fix his parkinson's disease.

One day we will have to decide what we want to do, invest in this technology and studies, (not saying free for all in this) or simply let the strongest survive and not find cures for other diseases like those and aids, cancer....

As soon as people think of using animals for studies, they think of cute bunnies being inserted seringes in their eyes, or monkeys being electrocuted or being intoxicated.... This is all the wrong information that is vehiculated in the public.

I know people who do work in research centers with animals, and I can tell you they are treated way better than a lot of us tend to do with our own pets.

I say if doing these kind of tests (hybrids, or testing medecines...) can save human lives and can be done in a humane way, then I am not totally agains't it.

What if I said, no let's not use the animals to do those tests, let's use the deficient people, the people who are born with defects, would this be ok? I am pretty sure we would all say no. So which will it be? None? Well are you ready to live with that if your child or husband or wife has a parkinson disease? has a spine injury and can't walk anymore, has contracted aids and knows he will die? If you knew there was a chance of finding a cure if you use an animal to test it, I am pretty sure you would be willing to close your eyes and let it happen, hoping it would prove to be the cure.

[sneaky_boa]

I'm going to comment on this because I do research and I know what actually happens to government money. Whether Bush is against it or not research like this is being funded not only by tax dollars, but by private investors. I know, especially in Canada, federal granting agencies like NSERC and CIHR are not the only way to get money...and they don't send their people to check what's going on in the labs. There are few controls in place that make sure the money is being sent the way you said it would be in the grant.

And THANK YOU Siretsap!!!! Poeple complain about what I do to my rats EVERYDAY! But then when they suddenly lose all function below the neck in a car accident, they come onto our floor and start wondering why it is that we can't fix it,,,,"Shouldn't science be able to do something??"

Folks, you can't have it both ways. You draw the line at no animal research and sacrifices, or you let them all take place. Making a stand somewhere in the middle becomes to sticky a situation, and ends up benefiting noone. To all good, there is a sacrifice that must be made!

[joey]

Yeah....let's continue to find ways to 'improve and prolong' the human body. Population problems? ...where? Let's continue to play Frankenstein and see how much we can mix up DNA with other creatures---animals are here for US, right?? At OUR disposal.

There has been SO much research that proves way beyond a doubt that we humans are destroying the planet. IN EVERY WAY.

We are a cancer. We are spreading. The more we learn the more we doom ourselves AND continue to wipe out everything in our path.

Personally, I think we are some great big experiment. Maybe a science project for some kid in a distant world. lol 'Let's create a world that has been perfected over billions of years and then sprinkle a few of these humans on it---give them a curious brain, natural resources, a need for power, strong desire to breed and see-just-how-long it takes them to completely DESTROY everything'.

I agree with the late William S. Burroughs........

"Man is a BAD animal'

Doesn't matter how you or I feel/think about all this----it's not going to stop. We can't.

[sneaky_boa]

Joey:
Nicely put (and in the words of my favorite person at that!) You're right about all of that, and I agree wholeheartedly. I feel the need to defend my research because it's my job, and I'm good at it. So yes, I am a hypocrite.

But it's too late to turn back the clock. The damage we have done (much of it) is irreverible, and there's little choice but to continue along the path we are on, and try to do as little harm as possible along the rest of our collective ways.

[Siretsap]

Originally posted by joey
We are a cancer. We are spreading. The more we learn the more we doom ourselves AND continue to wipe out everything in our path.


yes neo, ;-)

sorry just like almost hte exact words from the matrix...

Over population, well if you ever have parkinson's disease you come back and tell us you don't want any research done to help your case.

There are always 2 sides to a medal, time we also see some good sides to this one.

[joey]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Siretsap
[B]yes neo, ;-)

sorry just like almost hte exact words from the matrix...

...sorry, didn't see the movie.

[spidergecko]

Originally posted by Slannesh
Humans have either evolved or were created with an innate curiosity about the world we live in and the capacity to do something about it, that's the reason we're at the top of the food chain really.

Despite us living in an ecological "web" not "chain", parasites would be at the top of this so-called "chain", not people. In fact, most animals beat out man to the top of the "chain". But it's all a matter of who can kill and devour who first.

[Slannesh]

:rolleyes:

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think tactical nuclear weapons trump claws and teeth any day.

[Siretsap]

as odd as it may be, the ones that would prob survive to a nuclear blast are roaches... Damn things.

[concept3]

If they have to kill a couple pigs to save human lives, GO FOR IT. kill them all who cares their saving human lives.

[Bartman]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think tactical nuclear weapons trump claws and teeth any day.


If you put a human next to a tiger, the tiger will deffinetly win. But if you give the human a brain that is able to create a gun then yea your right we'd win.

I personally think humans are devolving. (is that a word?) What I mean is that instead of "growing" better parts or senses to aid in our survival such as a snake has a tounge to smell, all we are doing is getting machines to do it for us. I think this is making us lazy and inevitably dumber.

But staying more on track of the hybrids, I think that it perfectly okay to do it if your trying to save lives, but not one person here can deny the fact that human curiousity will cause one person to go beyond just creating organs and creating killer guinia pigs for example.

There will always always always be that person that wants to go beyond the "right" thing and do whatever they want to better themselves.

It sucks, but its true, which is why im not sure id want us to have this knowledge at all. I think a couple years, 10 maybe?, down the road we're going to fall into problems like this.

[Ixidor]

Is anyone else thinking of the movie dawn of the dead

You are now in the Twilight Zone doo doo doo doo doo :D

[joey]

Originally posted by concept3
If they have to kill a couple pigs to save human lives, GO FOR IT. kill them all who cares their saving human lives.

That's right folks, we deserve-- more than ANY creature out there-- to be on this planet.

Hell, they're ONLY animals, right? They don't feel pain, have thoughts or emotions. Animals are stupid. The fact that they've been here and have successfully evolved since the beginning, and know how to live WITH other creatures and not work against them or against the earth, leads me to believe that animals are far superior in the ART OF LIVING. Higher evolved-- than humans.

[Ixidor]

There are many different aspects to this arguement. I would have to say I think its wrong, as in Linds' case I'm also a person of faith. It just sounds like it could be too easy to screw up, not to mention the chances of somebody with enough money and greedy for power trying to do something crazy. Like Dawn of the Dead as I said earlier.

[joey]

Originally posted by Ixidor
T, not to mention the chances of somebody with enough money and greedy for power trying to do something crazy. Like Dawn of the Dead as I said earlier.

EXACTLY, that's exactly what would/will happen. The world is governed by the very rich and greedy. Power is king.

Altered monkies that no longer need to be rewarded after performing a task have been created. Perfect slaves---now if we could only do that with maybe the lower-class? ...hmmm. Or breed our own line of clones---our own military.

There's so much more out there we don't even know about. It's terribly obvious where all of this is headed.

[ydnic]

Sounds like a few of you need to take of your peta shirts and sit at the big kids table where we don`t snack on tofu sannies and drink soya soda.

Okay - just kidding

But really what does God have to do with any of this? If you want to get into God - apparently all animals are here for US..

And really - if you don`t like helping people who are sick or dying - I guess most of us should have died from the flu - tonsilitus- apendiscitus - blah blah blah

If anyone I knew was going to die (ie. mom, bf, father,grandparent friend) and all they needed was a peice of a pig to live - gimme a break that pig would have to die - how ever sad that made the world

[Bartman]

That's right folks, we deserve-- more than ANY creature out there-- to be on this planet.

Its not that we deserve to live on the planet more then them, but we ARE more superior. If you had to choose between saving a human life or an animal life, you cant say you wouldnt take the human life.

We have the ability, over other animals, to make ethical/concious decisions, unlike animals which act on instinct. This is the main reason why I believe we are more superior then animals.

[joey]

Like the recent story of a group of dolphins who encircled a tio of swimmers in Australia, and worked at keeping the people together to protect them from a BIG shark?

Or the story in Africa, where a group of elephants worked together in the night to free a herd of deer that were going to be relocated. Men thought the elephants came because of the food for the deer. They can smell ~very well~ big noses--lol. But when the giants reached the fenced in enlosure, the elephants managed to open the gate, pulled it open and then stepped back to let the deer free---then vanished along with the deer into the night .

I could go on.

Animals are much brighter than we believe. I'm not with peta and don't agree with MANY of their tactics-- I've just always had a certain sense about animals and the more I study them, watch them, what I've been reading and keeping finding--- the more interesting they become.

[HeatherRose]

Animals are much brighter than we believe. I'm not with peta and don't agree with MANY of their tactics--

Funny...you share an IP with the person who sent an essay exposing PETA to PETA themselves and then posted this:

Thank you for your e-mail to PETA notifying us of this inaccurate post you found.

Unfortunately, many chat rooms and Internet forums are set up and populated by people who disagree with animal rights because they feel it threatens their "right" to eat meat, wear fur, hunt, etc. Usually the information they post includes quotes that are taken out of context or outright false, misleading or inaccurate information--all of these are true in the case of the essay your forwarded to us. These individuals have often acquired misinformation from organizations which imply animal rights advocates have some sort of sinister agenda, although never been able to understand what's so sinister about compassion!

To learn more about one of the organizations spreading lies about us, visit http://www.consumerdeception.com.

Unfortunately, as the largest and most well known animal rights group, PETA is often a lightning rod for those who disagree with the movement as a whole, and many of the rumors that are spread about PETA are distorted or not grounded in reality at all.


While it's understandably tempting to argue with people contributing to these forums, there's very little we can do about it and we've found it's more effective to focus on people who are open-minded and more able to be receptive to learning about animal rights--instead of people whose minds are closed and who are determined not to listen.



:D

[hhw]

Perfect slaves---now if we could only do that with maybe the lower-class? ...hmmm. Or breed our own line of clones---our own military.

They already invented the television.

[joey]

Originally posted by hhw
They already invented the television.


...very nice. :D


I don't think peta would be very well liked on this forum. Doesn't matter to me.

[mudflats]

Camhanna do you enjoy putting words in peoples mouths? Einstein said himself he regreted discovering spliting the atom etc etc.. because of what people wanted to do with it. I simply implied that we will probably regret this in the future as einstien did. I never said i had anything against him. An with the religion comment it makes me laugh like all hell because that number you wrote will be filling hell with all the glory. Take care in the after life.

[hhw]

Einstein didn't discover how to split the atom, although his warning of nuclear chain reactions to Roosevelt did prompt the funding for the Manhattan project.

I've never heard of the term, "Einstein Moment", but I do not believe he ever regretted his theory of relativity. "Frankenstein Moment", if there is such a phrase, would seem to be more apt for what you are trying to describe.

[joey]

Einstein is my hero.

[spidergecko]

Originally posted by ydnic
[B]And really - if you don`t like helping people who are sick or dying - I guess most of us should have died from the flu - tonsilitus- apendiscitus - blah blah blah


"If abandoning animal research means that there are some things we cannot learn, then so be it... We have no basic right... not to be harmed by those natural diseases we are heir to."

Tom Regan

[sneaky_boa]

Hmmm...for a whole bunch of people fighting over animal rights, it seems strange to me that these are the same people who own animals and keep them caged. Often in smaller spaces than they would inhabit in the wild.

Just something to chew on while you fight to uphold your righteous selves.

[joey]

Who's fighting over animal rights?

[Ixidor]

Sneaky, you don't think our animals lead better lives then they would in the wild? I'm positive they are in much greater danger of getting harmed by their prey or eaten by a larger creature. Maybe, in captivity we increase the animals longetivity and in the wild they don't live quite as long.

[marisa]

How come people feel that other humans living in jail is a horrible way to live, while animals living in cages supposedly allows them to lead better lives? Sorry no offense, I just do not think it's up to us to decide a cage is a better life. I obviously keep plenty of animals in cages myself. I just don't think I can say one way or another what is the truely "better life" It really doesn't matter though since they cannot tell the differance.

Just my opinion and that really has nothing to do with the original debate I guess. :P :D

Marisa

[sneaky_boa]

I have a hard time believing that longevity is a concern of an animal. Better lives in captivity? What could be better than the natural environment wherein which the animal was born? And to which the animal was ideally suited and adapted? Predators and prey are part of the natural cycle of the universe. The best thing is natural....any beginner herp book will say the same thing.

[sneaky_boa]

I guess things are getting hugely off topic....
Sorry, I'll stop here!

[hhw]

I dunno about the rest of you, but being served food whenever I'm hungry and having 10 different females to service at my convenience whenever I'm in the mood for it sounds like a pretty good life to me.

I'm not sure if popping a bunch of hard white things bigger than the size of my head out my *** every year is all that great though.

[Ixidor]

Yeah they are fairly off topic, so last thing. I agree with you predators and prey are part of the natural cycle of the universe. If there were no predators, then wouldn't that probably make for a healthier and less stressed reptile ?

[sneaky_boa]

We'll simply have to agree to disagree my friend!

I can see both sides though....

:)

[Ixidor]

Yeah that was a little off topic anyways :D

[CamHanna]

Never mind. I made it into a PM.

[joey]

Why then, do snakes need such strong fitted doors, tops or whatever to keep them from always trying to escape?

~just a thought~

;)

[Siretsap]

you know joey, for someone who said that animals are smarter than we think, your avatar proves elsewise ;-)

[Siretsap]

Ixidor, if there were no predators, there wouln't be any snakes, since they are predators ;-)

In fact, if there were no predators on the earth, there would only be unicellular organisms, and even then, some could consider those to be predators since they invade other unicellulars ;-)

[joey]

ha ha ha

hmmmm..... ::: me thinks:::

I look at it like not representing a particular animal, but instead, society on a whole, we are ALL just going in circles, round and round and round, ---trying to make sense of it all. We just end up where we started--not really knowing ANYthing at all. The creature represents all of us...endlessly spinning in time biting our own tail ----

Even the pink background can represent the wombs from which we came. :rolleyes:

How was that? :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :cool:

[Siretsap]

yeah, I can see you already got your order from target ;)

[joey]

:p

[Bartman]

lmao..:D