CAOS Weekly Philosophy:How would you like to have 2 moms AND a dad too.

[Brad Nunnally]

The British government has given their scientist permission to create human embryos that have the genetic code of two female and one male. So, theoretically a child could be born that has three biological parents. This actually raises a whole bag of questions. First why is this being done? Should it be allowed to be done? Remember a section of the British government has given them permission already. In general it raises the big question of just because we can do something, should we? I mean what scientific purpose does having a child with three parents worth while? Personally I see this as a big waste of money and in some ways makes science just look bad. Science is supposed to help us move on as a society and answer some of the universes big questions. How does this experiment fall into either category?

Link to news article: 2 moms and 1 dad.

"The distance between insanity and genius is measured only by success."
Bruce Feirstein

[Tyler]

[obligatory joke] (adult material so all the professors close your eyes)
You know how much guys (the dads) would like that?  Guaranteed Threesomes!!!
[/obligatory joke]

[William Grim]

bluedragon0583 wrote:

I mean what scientific purpose does having a child with three parents worth while?

I'm sure it has plenty.  For instance, as far as I know, there are branches of math in use today that were created entirely for research purposes.  At the time of inception of the research-oriented math, their end-use was not clear or even guaranteed.

So, my point is that their research could teach us a lot about humans, even if the advantages are not yet clear to us.  The more knowledge, the better.  Perhaps these experiments will answer some of the big questions about the universe.

[raptor]

I do agree that we do not always know what the results of a scientific experiment will actual do for mankind, and there for, sometimes, we must carry on.  But I believe that this is more of an ethical question then a reasoning one.  Ultimaltely experimentation must have limits.  Granted some knowledge may there for be unobtainable.  But you must consider the consequences both good and bad for not only the whole of the human population but also for the test dummy.  There is also the question of public opinoin.  There are many people who believe scientific testing is a waste of money because they do not see instant results, or miracle products.  So we must not do anything that could further tarnish the image of science.

Scott

[anguyen]

The Biological Basic of the Experiment

Hi everybody,

I guess that I have recently talked too much in this forum :)â€Ã,¦ Thus I wanted to retire for a whileâ€Ã,¦  Yet this topic is very interesting and I just can't resist...

Anyway, being Biology majored, I’d like to provide the biological basic of this experimental research (I’m not trying to show offâ€Ã,¦I’m still a lowly undergrad. :) )â€Ã,¦  for people who do not have much biology background.

We know that a typical human cell have 2 main components: 1. the nucleus and 2. the rest of the cell (cell membrane, cytoplasm (the internal cellular fluid), and cellular organelles, etc).  The nucleus contains almost the entire genome, i.e. almost all the genetic material of the cell on 46 chromosomes.  Yet a very small part of the genome is outside of the nucleus, in the mitochondria, the cellular energy-producing organelle.

Sex cell (sperm or egg) only contains half number of chromosomes in a typical cell (somatic cell).  When a sperm is united with an egg, the sperm’ nucleus is fused with the egg’s to combine the genetic material from the father (23 chromosomes) with that from the mother (23).  The whole number of chromosomes of human genome (46) is then restored.  This mechanism makes different combinations of genetic materials possible to provide different biological advantages for the new individuals to function and adapt to the environment.  

After the union of the sperm and the egg, a new cell is created, which will then develop into a human embryo by further multiplying.  Only the mitochondria from the egg is passed onto the newly created cell.  In another word, the child inherits its mitochondria only from the mother.

Now, in this case, the cell resulted from the union of the sperm and egg from the original couple already has mitochondrial genetic defects (inherited from the mother).  If left alone, the soon-born child will surely have mitochondrial genetic defects.  

To prevent this from happening, the idea of the experiment is take the pro-nuclei, the nucleus of that human embryo, and inject it into a new, unfertilized and healthy egg with no mitochondrial genetic defects donated from a healthy woman, whose nucleus is already removed.  The genome of this new cell is the genetic material in the nucleus (the injected pro-nuclei from the old cell) plus the genetic material in the mitochondria of the new cell.  Theoretically, this new cell will develop into an embryo with no mitochondrial genetic defects.  

References:

http://ca.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559485/Fertilization.html

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/ddaley/B308.Fertiliz.1.htm

http://www.photovault.com/Link/Health/Anatomy/iFertilization/HAIVolume01.html

 :-D  :-D  :-D

[William Grim]

Man, that post was freaking long.  My CAOS attention span is only a few sentences in length.

[anguyen]

Scientists win right to create human embryo with three genetic parents by Mark Henderson/TimesOnline
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1772135,00.html

If the embryo grows into an adult woman, she would pass on the donated mitochondria to any children of her own, raising concerns about germ-line genetic manipulation.

The child only inherits its mitochondria from the mother.  Thus, if the child is a boy, then its mitochondria will not be passed onto the next generations.  

[anguyen]

grimw wrote:
Man, that post was freaking long.  My CAOS attention span is only a few sentences in length.

Sorry, Mike... :lol: I do not know how to explain all that in just a few sentences... I might need a PhD to do that... :-P

[anguyen]

So, why is this being done?
â€Ã,¦to prevent any diseases in the born child caused by the mitochondrial genetic defects.

Should  it be allowed to be done?
In my opinion, yes, because this will only benefit the child.  Who would want a child with genetic diseases or defects?  The child would not want it him/herself.

I mean what scientific purpose does having a child with three parents worth while?

I think they did not intentionally want to create a freak with 3 parents.  I think their intention is to help the child.

Personally I see this as a big waste of money and in some ways makes science just look bad.

In my opinion, it is not a waste of money.  It pioneers a new way for future medical treatments to benefit us humans.

Science is supposed to help us move on as a society

Yes, it does in this case.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9269062/

[anguyen]

tfizzle wrote:
[obligatory joke] (adult material so all the professors close your eyes)
You know how much guys (the dads) would like that?  Guaranteed Threesomes!!!
[/obligatory joke]

I know I want that too!... :-D

[anguyen]

grimw wrote:
Man, that post was freaking long.  My CAOS attention span is only a few sentences in length.

Mike...  I'm now learning the art of minimal writing... Thanks... :-D