UK Considers Using Human DNA In Animals

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - UK Considers Using Human DNA In Animals stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MARIA CHENG | 11/10/09 07:29 AM | AP

What's Your Reaction?
Dna

LONDON — British scientists begin a new study on Tuesday to consider how human DNA is used in animal experiments and to determine what the boundaries of such controversial science might be.

Though experts have been swapping human and animal DNA for years – like replacing animal genes with human genes or growing human organs in animals – scientists at the Academy of Medical Sciences want to make sure the public is aware of what is happening in laboratories before proceeding further.

"It sounds yucky, but it may be well worth doing if it's going to lead to a cure for something horrible," said Robin Lovell-Badge, a stem cell expert at Britain's National Institute for Medical Research, and a member of the group conducting the study.

At a media briefing in London, Lovell-Badge said there were two main types of experiments: altering an animal's genes by adding human DNA or replacing a specific animal sequence with its human counterpart. Several years ago, human genes were added to a mouse to create a model of Down's syndrome for scientists to study how the disease evolves, which could lead to potential treatments.

Scientists also have tried to grow human organs in animals that could one day be transplanted back into humans – like a mouse onto whose back scientists grew a human ear. "There are good reasons for doing this, but it may upset some people," Lovell-Badge said.

Two years ago, controversy erupted in Britain after scientists announced plans to create human embryos using empty cow and rabbit eggs. Critics condemned the mixing of human and animal genetic material, though scientists said the embryos would be destroyed after 14 days and would only be used to help them learn how to create human stem cells.

Scientists said they are now trying to determine where the line should be drawn on experiments that use human material in animals. At the moment, the regulation on how much human DNA can be put into an animal is vague.

"We are trying to work out what is reasonable," said Martin Bobrow, chairman of the group conducting the study. He and others said they recognized people might be nervous about experiments where animals were given human features or brain cells.

David King, director of Human Genetics Alert, an independent watchdog, said he was not convinced such experiments were warranted. "This is a classic example of science going too fast," he said. "If you cannot firmly say exactly what it is you're creating, you should not do it."

LONDON — British scientists begin a new study on Tuesday to consider how human DNA is used in animal experiments and to determine what the boundaries of such controversial science might be. Tho...
LONDON — British scientists begin a new study on Tuesday to consider how human DNA is used in animal experiments and to determine what the boundaries of such controversial science might be. Tho...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
20
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- RTIII I'm a Fan of RTIII 88 fans permalink

GO FOR IT!
.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:58 PM on 11/11/2009
photo

Opposable thumbs for everyone! YAY!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:57 PM on 11/10/2009
- lkim65 I'm a Fan of lkim65 18 fans permalink

This is wrong. Why is it with every new technology/power, humans always have to abuse it. Why is creating a Frankenstein such a bright idea. What mor.ons...

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:17 PM on 11/10/2009
- Jimboy17 I'm a Fan of Jimboy17 69 fans permalink

Frankenstein is actually the scientist in Mary Shelley's book...not the monster. It is the scientist who is monstrous in the end, as the monster ends up showing more humanity than the man who created it...interestingly enough.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:58 AM on 11/12/2009

DNA is just chemistry on a grand scale. Trying to declare which is human chemistry and which is not is a mighty peculiar idea.

This is not to say that there are not some protocols that should be observed and some ethical boundaries that don't require caution.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:07 PM on 11/10/2009
- Muggersmom I'm a Fan of Muggersmom 10 fans permalink
photo

Not right at all!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:28 PM on 11/10/2009
- nolabels I'm a Fan of nolabels 117 fans permalink
photo

Sounds like a lot of us are suffering from the yuck factor. Life is digital. We will only understand it biology we tinker and unravel its programming language. I am not sure how we can think that running a few experiments is going to yield disastrous results. The fear feels all too anthropocentric to me.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:23 PM on 11/10/2009

I'm going to love seeing whatever critters from myth turn up in laboratories.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 PM on 11/10/2009
- nolabels I'm a Fan of nolabels 117 fans permalink
photo

Minotaurs!!!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 PM on 11/10/2009
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 286 fans permalink
photo

Welcome to the brave new world where no one seems to have read the Island of Doctor Moreau. Hey... you cannot defend such experiments without explaining how this is not creating whole living creatures. Don't expect people to know it.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:43 PM on 11/10/2009
photo

The Island of Dr. Moreau is what popped up in my head too. If this isn't sick already, you can be sure it will lead to some pretty sick stuff...

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:40 PM on 11/10/2009
- freshmind I'm a Fan of freshmind 18 fans permalink

When it comes to the UK these days why is anyone surprised? Their gov't is a joke.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:37 PM on 11/10/2009
- Eidolas I'm a Fan of Eidolas 5 fans permalink

Sounds like someone better rent a copy of The Island of Dr. Moreau or perhaps O Lucky Man!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:33 PM on 11/10/2009
- wm1066 I'm a Fan of wm1066 34 fans permalink
photo

How about Soylent Green!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:53 PM on 11/10/2009
- Jimboy17 I'm a Fan of Jimboy17 69 fans permalink

This kind of chimerical science is the height of hubris and folly. Genetic traits in humans are frequently pleiotropic, which means that they are not the product of a single gene, but rather multiple genes in disparate locations. Genetic illnesses are frequently the product of several abberant mutations in different sequences. We don't yet understand exactly how most genetic illnesses come to be, and the recombinant possibilities over several generations of humans or animals are impossible to predict. Selection is the product of millions of years of refinement and co-evolution. It is a process we are only dimly beginning to understand. Because of this, the potential for great harm, either to ourselves or other species (and eventually ourselves) is huge. A good analogy is that of a child playing with a gun. The child knows it is a gun, but has no knowledge of how to use it, or the potential harm it can cause. Boggles the mind, really. This is the arrogance of capitalist science. This isn't about helping people, it is about making a few very rich.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:16 PM on 11/10/2009
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 286 fans permalink
photo

Perhaps the idea of human genome purity does not exist in reality. Perhaps our fellow earthlings who evolved right along beside us, are more closely related than we thought before we began to study genetics.

Your last two sentences nailed what i am worried about.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:48 PM on 11/10/2009
- deluk I'm a Fan of deluk 22 fans permalink
photo

No, if this was in the US it would be about making people very rich, I'm British and I'd certainly trust our scientists (who were responsible for dna in the first place) over yours any day, just as I'd trust our pharmecutical and medical industries over yours.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:09 PM on 11/10/2009
- Jimboy17 I'm a Fan of Jimboy17 69 fans permalink

You are most certainly daft. To begin with, I'm not a yank. Secondly, British scientists are not "responsible for DNA". Crick, Watson, and Wilkins were British, American, and Kiwi respectively, and they shared the 1962 nobel for biology for their discovery of the double helix structure of DNA (and it was an American firm which finally mapped the genome a few years back). While Britain still enjoys relatively large amounts of public funding for research, don't kid yourself as to the extent of corporate involvement.

Besides, you completely ignore the crux of my argument, which is that there is simply not enough understood about how genetic diseases occur, and what the effects of transgenic science might be one, two, or many generations in the future. We cannot model any of this effectively, and that is the problem.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 11/10/2009

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect