Human-animal hybrids

[chaplainM]

Are the bacteria that are given human genes to produce human insulin considered "human-animal hybrids?"

[Atman]

1. You know what I'm more concerned about?

Do animal-human hybrids get better mileage than regular humans?

[Rick Myers]

2. Yes, they run on magic switchgrass!!!

Ack!

[Dr.Phool]

4. They're cheaper to feed.

Big 40 lb. bags of dog food.

[BulletproofLandshark]

3. They shouldn't be.

Bacteria are classified as part of the monera kingdom. They're not animals at all.

http://www.sidwell.edu/us/science/vlb5/Labs/Classification_Lab/monera.html

[applegrove]

5. Hey - plant, plant hybrids are okay. Anything in genetic engineering

of crops.

[tanyev]

6. I saw a bunch of them human-animal hybrids in that Narnia movie

yesterday. Maybe all the fundies who went to see the movie thought they were real.

[PaulaFarrell]

7. It's really happening...

Animal-Human Hybrids Spark Controversy
Maryann Mott

Scientists have begun blurring the line between human and animal by producing chimeras—a hybrid creature that's part human, part animal.

Chinese scientists at the Shanghai Second Medical University in 2003 successfully fused human cells with rabbit eggs. The embryos were reportedly the first human-animal chimeras successfully created. They were allowed to develop for several days in a laboratory dish before the scientists destroyed the embryos to harvest their stem cells.


In Minnesota last year researchers at the Mayo Clinic created pigs with human blood flowing through their bodies.

And at Stanford University in California an experiment might be done later this year to create mice with human brains.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/01/0125_050125_chimeras.html


U.S. Denies Patent for a Too-Human Hybrid
Scientist Sought Legal Precedent to Keep Others From Profiting From Similar 'Inventions'

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, February 13, 2005; Page A03

A New York scientist's seven-year effort to win a patent on a laboratory-conceived creature that is part human and part animal ended in failure Friday, closing a historic and somewhat ghoulish chapter in American intellectual-property law.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected the claim, saying the hybrid -- designed for use in medical research but not yet created -- would be too closely related to a human to be patentable.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A19781-2005Feb12?language=printer

Patent allows creation of man-animal hybrid

Special report: the ethics of genetics

Antony Barnett, public affairs editor
Sunday November 26, 2000
The Observer

A biotech company has taken out a Europe-wide patent on a process which campaigners claim would allow 'chimeric' animals to be developed with body parts originating from humans.

An Australian company, Amrad, was granted the patent last year, which covers embryos containing cells both from humans and from 'mice, sheep, pigs, cattle, goats or fish'.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,403160,00.html



For once, Bush is right. This kind of research needs to be stopped. The problem is that we are having no public discussion of these issues; instead the scientists apparently get to decide how far they go. No offense to any scientists out there, but many just seem top want to push the envelope as far as possible, without considering the ethical ramifications of what they're doing. I don't think it is their decision to make, but one that soceity as a whole should make. What with the glow-in-dark pigs and all, I am getting kind of scared and I don't really want to live in a brave new world. I thought Margaret Atwood was far-fectched in Oryx and Crake, but now I'm starting to think she was just very prescient.

[karlrschneider]

8. Mice with human brains?

There's one squatting in our White House right now. :eyes:


Oh wait...I got it bass ackward. :evilgrin:

[KnaveRupe]

9. What do you want to do tonight Dick?

The same thing we do every night, Georgie! Try and TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!!!

[PaulaFarrell]

11. Trying to see the humour

just failing I guess

[karlrschneider]

14. I guess it was too subtle. Sorry.

:eyes:

[salin]

19. how would a human brain fit into a mouse?

[Beetwasher]

24. Obviously, The Mouse Would Have To Be VERY Conceited

n/t

[Solon]

12. While the "Frankenstien" factor is definately a problem...

There is also potential for great strides in medical research that this can lead too. Just as with theraputic cloning, the ethical issue is somewhat gray, however, that doesn't mean that this line of research should be stopped. To give but one example, as in the article you cited, pigs with Human DNA present can be harvested for organs, we already have huge shortages in viable human organs to be harvested, yet they can serve as a viable replacement. Though the biggest problem I can see is that these particular pigs should never be used as food stock for we already know what indirect cannibalism can lead to in other animals, like mad cow disease, and the human "shaking disease", so best to avoid that.

[PaulaFarrell]

18. Yeah, I'm against transgenics as well

for much the same reasons, but the added one that using pig or other animal organs will provide a pathway for a whole new range of diseases. The harvesting of organs from animal donors is an incredibly cruel process. It certainly won't cure the human race which just seems to come up with new diseases all the time. I honestly feel that the research is not being done for the benefit of mankind but primarily for money and also because it's inherent in the research process to try to go as far as you can. If all the money being spent on research into these lines of work was instead spent on reseach into prevention, then I think we'd actually see some improvement in people's health. Maybe even vaccine against malaria. Now that'd be something.

[PaulaFarrell]

20. I meant against xenotranplantation...

and here's why:

http://www.xenodiaries.org/ec001122.htm

Animal organs a risk to humans

By Ben Wyld
January 13, 2004

Fears that humans may be at risk of contracting diseases through animal organ transplants have been raised after a study revealed that human and animal DNA can fuse together naturally.

Researchers from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, found that pigs developed human and hybrid cells in their blood and organs after they were injected with human blood stem cells.

The hybrid cells were also found to contain the porcine endogenous retrovirus, a pig virus similar to HIV, which was able to transmit to normal human cells.

The finding raises the possibility that xenotransplantation, a procedure in which organs from pigs are implanted into humans, could allow animal viruses to pass to the recipient's human cells.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/12/1073877762927.html

[Maru Kitteh]

21. If you want to avoid prion disease

you should stop eating other mammals period. It's crossed multiple species bariers over and over again and make no mistake, it is here.

[FlaGranny]

13. You're right

we don't need these kinds of experiments. They might be able tocure diabetes or even paraplegics. We can't have that.

Animals with human cells are NOT human. A human cell is not a human. The ONLY problem would be if this were done in reverse and start growing animal parts on actual humans.

[karlrschneider]

15. Hmmm. I wonder if I could grow a horse pecker...

:evilgrin:

[FlaGranny]

25. You wouldn't want one, Karl,

you'd scare 99.99999% of the female AND male populations (whatever your preference) to flight.

[karlrschneider]

27. I pretty much do that anyway...

:D

[PaulaFarrell]

17. that's a big 'might'

it is of course always trotted out as a defense for scientists to pursue any line of research they wish. And peple swallow it hook, line and sinker.

" The ONLY problem" - are you serious? If you are it's because you haven't really thought about it. There are serious ethical issues involved. Do you really think scientists will be content to add a few cells here and there? No, they will begin to breed animal hybrids (I believe they've laready done this). What is the status of these animals? In a world which is moving toward increased recognition of animal rights, would these be recognised as animals, or simply as experiments? What happens when they escape into the environment?

And just where would the line be drawn between what's human and what's not? I am saying that these are serious ethical issues which will help determine the future of the world, and not necessarily in a good way. But the decisions on what's allowed and what should be allowed are not being made by society for the benefit of society. Tyey are being made in laboratories and patent offices. I don't think scientists are the people to make the decisions, not least because they are so involved in their work atht they can hardly be objective. It's a discussion that needs to be out there, but when someone raises it ( a person whom I completely despise, by the way) all it gets is derision.

[FlaGranny]

23. Yes, they have bred an animal hydrid.

It is called a mule or a jenny and they have been around for a LONG time.

This "animal/human hybrid" is misnamed and it is misnamed very much on purpose, to cause people to react in horror at a human animal mixture, I guess something that that would look like a mermaid or a centaur.

Definition
Hybrid: "An organism that is the offspring of genetically dissimilar parents or stock; especially offspring produced by breeding plants or animals of different varieties or breeds or species"

If you read that definition, it is describing sexual reproduction. Fundamentalists are trying cause revulsion by deliberately misleading people.

People have been trying to hybridize animals for a long, long time. Most animals and most plants CANNOT be hydridized. They have to be very genetically similar in the first place, like a horse and a donkey. A horse and a human CANNOT be hybridized. A dog and a horse cannot be hybridized. A human cannot be hybridized with a rat or a pig. An oak tree cannot be hybridized with a tulip.

The scientific experiments are about something totally and completely different. They take a little DNA of one animal and place it in another. For instance, a little human DNA into a pig. The pig is still a pig. It doesn't grow human parts. It doesn't begin to talk. What it does is contain some human DNA, which would make its parts less likely to be rejected if used in transplants.

By the way, the heart valves of pigs (porcine valves) have been used in humans for many years.

And no matter what they do with animals, they should be treated humanely - that's a given. And yes - these animals should be carefully kept away from others of their species to avoid crossbreeding.

[PaulaFarrell]

28. A mule is not a GMO

1) scientists HAVE been experimenting with growing human parts on other species

2) animals used in genetic experimentation and xenotansplantation are not treated humanely

3) genetic modification goes outside the boundaries or normal species replication; there is no requirement that species be closely related for them to be hybidized in this way; once in a living organsim DNA mutates. Scientits have found that the GMO has more differences from the original donor species than just the modified genes.

4) once in the public market place (as with the tropical fish below) how do you propose to enforce controls keeping the GMO separate from the pure species?

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,,1177023,00.html

Human breasts grown on mice

Thursday March 25, 2004
The Guardian


Scientists who famously grew a human ear on the back of a mouse may finally have been trumped. Genetically engineered mice have now been used to grow lumps of human breast.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/thisweek/story/0,,1093632,00.html

How soon before we see GM pets in the shops?

Ian Sample
Thursday November 27, 2003
The Guardian


In January, American pet shops will begin stocking genetically modified versions of tropical freshwater zebrafish. The small fish, which are normally black and silver, have had the equivalent of a new paint job, thanks to the insertion of a gene extracted from sea anemones that makes them fluoresce bright red. It will be the first time GM pets have been available to the American public.
The new "GloFish" (above) were developed by scientists in Singapore to fluoresce only when they swam into polluted waters, turning them into living environmental monitors. But Yorktown Technologies, the Texas-based biotech company that is going to sell the fish, hopes they will make attractive pets, too.


http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,1081922,00.html

MPs urge inquiry into Huntingdon xenotransplantation

Polly Curtis
Tuesday November 11, 2003
The Guardian


A committee of MPs is considering an investigation of the Home Office's animal research watchdog after it defended its decision to allow experiments involving the transplantation of genetically modified piglets' hearts into the necks of wild baboons to be classed as "moderate".
The xenotransplantation experiments were carried out before 2000 by private company Imutran at the Huntingdon Life Sciences laboratories in Cambridge. But details became public only after a legal battle between the company and animal rights group Uncaged Campaigns, to whom documents had been leaked. These documents, published in April, showed a quarter of the baboons died from "technical failures"; others were left with wounds weeping fluid and several died on the journey to Britain.


http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,845642,00.html

Controversy over 'new life' experiment

Staff and agencies
Friday November 22, 2002


A controversial American experiment to create new life forms could take place in the UK without public debate, a biotech watchdog warned today.
The caution from GeneWatch UK comes after US scientists announced they planned to engineer a single-celled man-made organism with the minimum number of genes necessary to sustain life. The project, funded by a £2m grant from the US energy department, has sparked an ethical debate about whether humans have the moral right to create new organisms


http://www.guardian.co.uk/genes/article/0,,627789,00.html

Dolly's arthritis

Friday January 4, 2002

Why does it matter that a sheep has arthritis?
Because the sheep in question, Dolly, was the world's first mammal cloned from an adult cell. If she is found to be prematurely aging it means that the cloning process may create genetic defects. Arthritis is an inflammation of the joints found most often in the elderly.

Why was Dolly cloned?

To see if cloning technologies could work. If they did, it would then be possible not just to make identical copies of animals (in itself relatively pointless) but to create animals genetically modified so that their internal organs could be transplanted to sick humans.


Are animal to human transplants now more or less likely?
It is difficult to say. PPL Therapeutics, the firm that helped to clone Dolly, this week announced it had cloned five piglets lacking an alpha gal gene. This, the company said, would be the first step towards creating "knock out pigs" that had their internal organs' natural resistance to be being put into humans made inactive.

But if Dolly was born with genetic defects leading to premature aging, the future of cloning becomes less certain. Its critics point out that many cloned animals die before birth or shortly after, often with genetic mutations. Putting a cloned animal organ that is genetically defective into a human being may not be as effective as it was once believed it could be, especially when the much longer lifespan of human beings than most farmyard animals is taken into account.

[FlaGranny]

29. Yes, a mule is a "hybrid"

Almost all of the tomatoes you eat are hybrids. As far as I know, a human has never been hybridized with another species, but there are rumors it has been tried. It is just not possible. The phraseology being used is animal/human "hybrid" - they are using the word "hybrid" to give a false impression that hybrids are being bred - "bred" is a term connoting sexual reproduction. They are using it for shock value.

1) Yes, they are - I saw a human-shaped ear on a mouse - but the ear was not human. The experiment was done by implanting, I believe, silicone under the mouse's skin that had the shape of a human ear, to see if the skin of another species could be used to replace a human part. An animal with some human DNA allows the human to be given the ear without as much danger of tissue rejection. There would be absolutely no use to take an actual human part and graft it onto an animal - none that makes sense, anyway.

2) Animals used in experimentation SHOULD be treated humanely.

3) This is not hybridization. It is genetic modification - hybridization is sexual reproduction. Hybridization is not an option - most species cannot be mated with another species and produce offspring.

4) The fish seem harmless enough, but I could see a danger in some species.

How did cloning become part of this argument? Cloning has nothing to do with either hybridization OR GMO.

[jim3775]

16. The "glow-in-the-dark pig" is a major innovation

the so-called "glow-in-the-dark" technology that was demonstrated in these pigs will allow scientists to see how stem cells, cancer cells and viruses spread thought the body.

[Maru Kitteh]

22. What are we become?

So we destroy the world to save ourselves.

The unimaginable cruelty and abuse we inflict on our fellow creation can only grow with this kind of atrocity.

[Tom Joad]

10. Do they get to use the carpool lanes too?

[Odin2005]

26. "bacteria that are given human genes to produce human insulin"

OMG! We are puting HUMAN genes into bacteria? GET THE ANTI-GM organism people!

:sarcasm: