Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 218 posts

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#161

Post by ethbro »

sgc wrote: post #137
cronix wrote: post #57

From my laymans POV, DNA is just a shit ton of variables in a very complex code that interact with each other. No single point just does a single thing. They all interact with each other. No different than changing a variable in one piece of code and having it create a bug in another that was previously working. For me, the real scary part is altering something, which inadvertently changes something else that isn't q…

This is why I am strongly against anything but the most urgent genetic engineering. We completely screwed up the industrial revolution. We have never recovered from it, and maybe never will. So now we are going to start in on biology?

> We completely screwed up the industrial revolution.

Wait, WHAT?!

The thing that allowed millions of people to ascend from what would now be seen as abject poverty and subsistence farming?

The thing that enabled mass tool manufacture that eventually led to the Green Revolution and boosted agricultural yields enough to increase the planet's carrying capacity a few orders of magnitude?

THAT screw up?!

Say what you want about the environmental consequences and our failure to manage carbon and toxic byproducts.

But there's objectively no way you can say the Industrial Revolution didn't vault the entire world's population technologically, medically, and materially forward.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#162

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

anigbrowl wrote: post #125
Spooky23 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think about wolves. Over many generations of selective breeding, we have poodles. No engineering required, but obviously a huge change.

Another example would be King Charles Spaniels, which are overbred to have tiny heads and big cute eyes - and are at high risk of seizures from compression of the brain by the skull :-( I have shepherds and there's a big philosophical split between shepherd owners who want 'working line' dogs and those who want 'show dogs' that are significantly more likely to have health problems. Dog breeding is a very poorly regul…

I wonder what possess people to want to own dog breeds that are physically deformed by design.

What kind of brain injury do you have to have to go out of your way to want to breed these dogs?

And why the hell don’t / haven’t animal rights activists, and society in general, vigorously pursue regulation to ban these absurd breeds.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#163

Post by Gibbon1 »

ejstronge wrote: post #109
Gibbon1 wrote: post #98

Quote: and they fear that mutated genes may spread unchecked as animals breed. Reminds me, similar thing happened with cattle. Some breeding bulls are used to impregnate tens of thousands of cows. I fail to remember the details but one of them 30-40 years ago had a genetic defect which contaminated a lot of the US stock. Found a link https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/10/the-dairy...

> Some breeding bulls are used to impregnate tens of thousands of cows. I fail to remember the details but one of them 30-40 years ago had a genetic defect which contaminated a lot of the US stock. The other side to that story is that, while the breeding male's genes led to more spontaneous abortions (i.e., pregnancies that ended unexpectedly with calf loss), his daughters produced a lot more milk. From the same arti…

The cautionary note is this wasn't discovered until the recessive gene effected about 10% of the cattle population.

Given the unknowns there is the potential that malign genetics wouldn't be discovered until several generation have passed. Human generations are 20-40 years. Possible that propagating rare mutations that appear to have beneficial effect may come at a high cost that is only apparent 50-100 years from now.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#164

Post by albertgoeswoof »

code_beers wrote: post #143
albertgoeswoof wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That genetic modification can, and does, happen naturally, all the time. It’s how evolution works

That talking point has already been attempted by others. Using one term, genetic modification, for several completely different processes doesn’t hide the truth, it just confuses people. And no, grafting entire sections of bacterial DNA into plant genomes absolutely does not happen in nature. Please read the link, then get back to me with any actual scientifically founded refutations you may have. Citations are throu…

The site you linked to is from this guy:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_M._Smith

Who has written 2 anti GMO books and made a movie about it. It’s a direct conflict of interest, there’s no point in reading what he writes because it’s obviously biased.

He’s not a scientist either and the Institute for Responsible Technology is just his personal blog.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#165

Post by trevyn »

jayalpha wrote: post #132
smaddox wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GM foods are arguably no more dangerous than any massively engineered foods we've been eating for decades/centuries. Direct gene modification is more like using a scalpel rather than a 2x4. Still potentially dangerous, but far more precise.

"GM foods are arguably no more dangerous than any massively engineered foods " This may be your opinion. While GM foods are not per see dangerous, the long tail risk is tremendous, exactly because you can not tell what a gene is going to do in another organism. Take my word for it, I have a PhD in that shit. Taleb also advocates the precautionary principle: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.5787.pdf

You’re probably right, but could you provide an example of an unexpected consequence of an inserted gene?

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#166

Post by macoovacany »

cronix wrote: post #57

From my laymans POV, DNA is just a shit ton of variables in a very complex code that interact with each other. No single point just does a single thing. They all interact with each other. No different than changing a variable in one piece of code and having it create a bug in another that was previously working. For me, the real scary part is altering something, which inadvertently changes something else that isn't q…

> From my laymans POV, DNA is just a shit ton of variables in a very complex code that interact with each other. No single point just does a single thing. They all interact with each other. No different than changing a variable in one piece of code and having it create a bug in another that was previously working.

Drew Endy did a lecture this a while ago. It's from one of the chaos computer club seminars.

https://vimeo.com/18201463

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#167

Post by [deleted] »

cronix wrote: post #57

From my laymans POV, DNA is just a shit ton of variables in a very complex code that interact with each other. No single point just does a single thing. They all interact with each other. No different than changing a variable in one piece of code and having it create a bug in another that was previously working. For me, the real scary part is altering something, which inadvertently changes something else that isn't q…

[deleted]

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#168

Post by all2 »

echelon wrote: post #81
all2 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that the human microbiome [0] takes up genetic material from the food we consume, I'd be concerned about eating this stuff. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711824/

This paper is talking about horizontal gene transfer between bacteria of the gut and bacteria we consume.

So, a moot point if the food is cooked enough? (all the DNA will uncoil and denature)

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#169

Post by dcow »

aetherson wrote: post #155
hanniabu wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Something like "everybody will get Alzheimers by age 50" where it takes 50 years to even discover it. Yup, and my then the market is established and the companies creating the market will say it's impossible to know that the side effect was actually caused by altering your DNA, and go on knowingly selling services that are destroying lives all in the name of money

So, look, don't do this. This isn't about whether and to what degree "companies" are cartoonishly evil. And when you divert the conversation into that very well worn path, you distract from other problems. There are lots of threads on HN where complaints about corporate ethics are on topic.

This is absolutely on topic because it’s exactly how the problem proliferates. In isolation it can be corrected but as soon as we build and industry on it and it becomes part of the economy...well... It may be cartoonish with sugar and diabetes but not so much when our entire species is at stake.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#170

Post by ejstronge »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #163
ejstronge wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some breeding bulls are used to impregnate tens of thousands of cows. I fail to remember the details but one of them 30-40 years ago had a genetic defect which contaminated a lot of the US stock. The other side to that story is that, while the breeding male's genes led to more spontaneous abortions (i.e., pregnancies that ended unexpectedly with calf loss), his daughters produced a lot more milk. From the same arti…

The cautionary note is this wasn't discovered until the recessive gene effected about 10% of the cattle population. Given the unknowns there is the potential that malign genetics wouldn't be discovered until several generation have passed. Human generations are 20-40 years. Possible that propagating rare mutations that appear to have beneficial effect may come at a high cost that is only apparent 50-100 years from no…

I share your general concern, but would like to point out that this particular example couldn’t happen in human genetics for a variety of reasons (we are less consanguineous, practice assortative mating, get extensive medical care including fertility treatments).

A bigger issue would be one particular implementation of genetic testing taking off in a group of humans who might otherwise be expected to produce offspring together. Perhaps - community of wealthy families all ordering the same IQ boosting agent may find that their grandchildren all share some unusual, genetically recessive ailment.

Post reply on HN