View Full Version : Three-parent embryo formed in lab


Rik Meleet
Feb 05, 2008, 02:33 PM
From the BBC website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7227861.stm)

Scientists believe they have made a potential breakthrough in the treatment of serious disease by creating a human embryo with three separate parents.

The Newcastle University team believe the technique could help to eradicate a whole class of hereditary diseases, including some forms of epilepsy. The embryos have been created using DNA from a man and two women in lab tests. It could ensure women with genetic defects do not pass the diseases on to their children. The technique is intended to help women with diseases of the mitochondria - mini organelles that are found within individual cells. They are sometimes described as "cellular power plants" because they generate most of the cell's energy. Faults in the mitochondrial DNA can cause around 50 known diseases, some of which lead to disability and death. About one in every 6,500 people is affected by such conditions, which include fatal liver failure, stroke-like episodes, blindness, muscular dystrophy, diabetes and deafness. At present, no treatment for mitochondrial diseases exists.

Genetic transplant

The Newcastle team have effectively given the embryos a mitochondria transplant. They experimented on 10 severely abnormal embryos left over from traditional fertility treatment. Within hours of their creation, the nucleus, containing DNA from the mother and father, was removed from the embryo, and implanted into a donor egg whose DNA had been largely removed. The only genetic information remaining from the donor egg was the tiny bit that controls production of mitochondria - around 16,000 of the 3billion component parts that make up the human genome. The embryos then began to develop normally, but were destroyed within six days.

Appearance

Experiments using mice have shown that the offspring with the new mitochondria carry no information that defines any human attributes. So while any baby born through this method would have genetic elements from three people, the nuclear DNA that influences appearance and other characteristics would not come from the woman providing the donor egg. However, the team only have permission to carry out the lab experiments and as yet this would not be allowed to be offered as a treatment. Professor Patrick Chinnery, a member of the Newcastle team, said: "We believe that from this work, and work we have done on other animals that in principle we could develop this technique and offer treatment in the forseeable future that will give families some hope of avoiding passing these diseases to their children." Dr Marita Pohlschmidt, of the Muscular Dystrophy Campaign, which has funded the Newcastle research, was confident it would lead to a badly needed breakthrough in treatment. "Mitochondrial myopathies are a group of complex and severe diseases," she said. "This can make it very difficult for clinicians to provide genetic counselling and give patients an accurate prognosis." However, but the Newcastle work has attracted opposition. Josephine Quintavalle, of the pro-life group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said it was "risky, dangerous" and a step towards "designer babies". "It is human beings they are experimenting with," she said. "We should not be messing around with the building blocks of life." Mrs Quintavalle said embryo research in the US using DNA from one man and two women was discontinued because of the "huge abnormalities" in some cases. Dr David King, of Human Genetics Alert, expressed concern about a "drift towards GM babies".
Wow. :eek:
Genetic disease busting.

StarWorms
Feb 05, 2008, 03:01 PM
Excellent news, although I wish the media would report it better: Three-parent suggests that there's 3 copies of the nuclear genetic information. Similar to the human-cow hybrid embryos, people will start to think it's a freak.

It's excellent news. It's not a step towards 'designer babies' at all. It's a step towards the prevention of disease.

Abaddon
Feb 05, 2008, 03:30 PM
Go go Newcastle University! :D

Masquerouge
Feb 05, 2008, 03:41 PM
Josephine Quintavalle, of the pro-life group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said it was "risky, dangerous" and a step towards "designer babies". "It is human beings they are experimenting with," she said. "We should not be messing around with the building blocks of life." Mrs Quintavalle said embryo research in the US using DNA from one man and two women was discontinued because of the "huge abnormalities" in some cases. Dr David King, of Human Genetics Alert, expressed concern about a "drift towards GM babies".

Boooh! Party-poopers!

;)

stickciv
Feb 05, 2008, 05:56 PM
Well, we have to evolve somehow. I mean, we suppressed natural evolution, so maybe modifying some DNA wont be so bad.

zxcvbnm
Feb 06, 2008, 05:32 AM
Well, we have to evolve somehow. I mean, we suppressed natural evolution, so maybe modifying some DNA wont be so bad.

How have we suppressed it? Some of our genes are evolving faster than ever, making us suited for cities instead of small tribes.

StarWorms
Feb 06, 2008, 02:41 PM
How have we suppressed it? Some of our genes are evolving faster than ever, making us suited for cities instead of small tribes.Because people who move to cities are dying in their droves before they procreate? Selective forces have largely been removed in developed countries.

Verge
Feb 06, 2008, 03:18 PM
Interesting stuff; back in high school, I remember the pessimism one of my teachers had when discussing mitochondrial diseases. It's great knowing that there are people making progress on such ailments.

stickciv
Feb 06, 2008, 04:29 PM
Because people who move to cities are dying in their droves before they procreate? Selective forces have largely been removed in developed countries.

Exactly what I meant. I mean, this whole development is actually two-fold, one part supporting evolution by our own hands, and the other suppressing natural evolution. We could eliminate diseases which in nature would have wiped out the 'weak' individuals, and at the same time we could engineer ourselves to be stronger. In effect, we've taken over Nature's job, and we have some changes that we want to make.

Serutan
Feb 06, 2008, 09:33 PM
Excellent news, although I wish the media would report it better: Three-parent suggests that there's 3 copies of the nuclear genetic information. Similar to the human-cow hybrid embryos, people will start to think it's a freak.

It's excellent news. It's not a step towards 'designer babies' at all. It's a step towards the prevention of disease.

Hard to see how it isn't a step towards designer babies. It's certainly not
the intent of this research team to do that, but the fact that genetic material
from two eggs is mixed together means that it could likely be done if the
time and resources were devoted to it.

Eran of Arcadia
Feb 14, 2008, 07:18 AM
We haven't eliminated or suppressed evolution, just changed the pressures. Now, instead of external selection pressures, like the ability to survive and gather resources in a particular environment, we have things that are being selected like the ability/tendency to have large numbers of offspring. That's still evolution. Besides, it usually moves slowly enough that we wouldn't have expected to see much in the period during which it is said to have been suppressed.

lordqarlyn
Feb 14, 2008, 04:00 PM
From the BBC website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7227861.stm)


Wow. :eek:
Genetic disease busting.

Actually pretty awesome. Kind of strange though, I wonder what relationship the woman who contributed the mitochondrial DNA will have, if any? Mom 2?

On the topic evolution, it is safe to say that becoming civilized has reduced the impact of natural selection on humans, especially in recent times. Consider:
Most species change in response to pressures from the environment. But humans have control over our environment like no other living thing ever has.

We produce food on a scale unheard of, so we no longer have to hunt and gather.

We have modern medicine and sanitation, so we are exposed far less pathogenic microbes, and almost any injury can be treated successfully.

We live in climate-controlled houses, drive in climate-controlled cars, and work in climate-controlled offices virtually protecting us from the elements.

Society has made monogamy the virtual norm (unlike the harems that are prevalent in the animal kingdom and early civilizations), so any male has a chance of finding a female and passing his genes.

In the end, there is virtually no competitive survival going on with the human race. A weak, infirm, and mentally deficit individual is able to pass their genes the same as a muscular, healthy, and highly intelligent superhuman would. Such a situation would rarely ever occur in nature.

We can argue there is social competition, and there is. But, today - in the West at least and increasingly in other parts of the world - with the "All men are created equal" belief, marriage and reproduction across social status is relatively common. The end result, the human race is not evolving, because there are no environmental pressures that limit reproduction or survival, and indeed it can be argued we as a species are becoming dumber, weaker, and unhealthier.

This is simply observation; I am not proposing any kind of change or anything. Just food for thought.