Genetic Manipulation

[rocksteady]

How long until we can make designer babies, technologically speaking?

I was just wondering if anyone had some specialized knowledge in this field and could give me a "state of the union" on manipulating genetics.

I am basically just wondering how many breakthroughs are needed before we can start actively reprogramming DNA on humans.

5-10 years?
15-20 years?

thanks in advance!

[OmegaPsi]

I cant say that I have any real knowledge on the subject, and I bet your thinking "Then why is this fool speaking on my thread?" =) But Im just taking it from a logical standpoint. If were really having this much of a problem on Stem Cell recearch, I doubt we would be able to genetically modify any humans. You know those activists and such and the fanatical religious "You are defacing the form god has laid down for humanity! Its a sin, and you will burn in hell for it!!!" So I dont even think in 15-20 years well be able to do it.
Just for political and religious issues.

[xhaan]

How long until we can make designer babies, technologically speaking?

I was just wondering if anyone had some specialized knowledge in this field and could give me a "state of the union" on manipulating genetics.

I am basically just wondering how many breakthroughs are needed before we can start actively reprogramming DNA on humans.

5-10 years?
15-20 years?

thanks in advance!

Um, we probably could hack some together right now, with a lot of failings... which is one of the reasons it isn't done at this time I think.

And really, it's gone on with animals for quite a long time, not with specific DNA sequencing, but knowing genetic traits and mixing them to get different colors and coat types, etc... doing it in a lab isn't a massive step anymore I don't think.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

[brewmaster]

A very very very long time before we can get anywhere to being able to pick and choose or manipulate the genome like what I think you are talking about or the kind of thing they are talking about on the 'genetic engineering' split off thread. Even considering the pace of the field right now my opinion is >200 years.

The only thing we really can do right now is clear the pathogenicity out of a retrovirus and replace it with a gene or a couple genes of interest and infect. Designer babies means we would have to reconstruct entire chromosomes to replace current ones. That is going to require an immense amount of knowledge we simply do not possess or are close to having. We cannot even do this with plants.

[thod]

Its not as far off as that when it comes to adding single genes. You may recall a decade ago the story of adding the gene from arctic flounders to strawberries. It produces anti freeze and lets the strawberry survive frosts. Its real and now, we got a better strawberry.

Monsanto and others make a very good living out of producing these GMO crops. You could do it with humans too, now, and produce modified humans. We are nowhere near being able to design a human on a computer and assemble the DNA at a molecular level though. Current techniques rely on inserting the DNA randomly and hoping you get a good one somewhere in the batch.

[Drayakir]

Yeah, we're already managing to insert genes pretty easily- I mean I did it in my HS lab, and repeatedly at college, and presumably going to at work. But you must understand the limitations. Firstly, the restriction enzymes make incisions in several places, and there exists a fixed amount of types of restriction enzymes.

That's the first problem. The second problem is that genes are controlled by operons, and since operons aren't part of the gene themselves, they could be harder to insert- after all, we don't want continuous bone growth?

The third problem is that we'd be operating with single pre-existing genes. It's very hard to make 'small' changes, because you're adding and deleting genes... to use a mathematical example, you can either have a 1 or a 2- you can't have a 1.1 or a 1.63.

Finally, some kinds of genes cannot co-exist because of the way they work. I'm pretty sure if we were to give a human a venom sack, he'd end up poisoning himself; or if we were to give him the electric accumulators of the eel. Finally there's TATA boxes, and isomporphism...

Basically, what I'm saying is that right now genetic engineering is at the stages of hacking away at a limb with a stone axe for surgery. We're far from stitching.

[rocksteady]

The only thing we really can do right now is clear the pathogenicity out of a retrovirus and replace it with a gene or a couple genes of interest and infect.

What kind of things can you do with processes like this ?

is it possible to engineer/tamper viruses that can manipulate DNA for an intended effect? Are there viruses that can change DNA?
It seems like most medical/science breakthroughs are just piggybacking/modifying existing natural processes. It seems like viruses can be a "carrier" for some processes. I am sure there are tons of risks and dangers surrounding this kind of research though (I am Legend!)

sorry, i am not well versed on genetics, but I am pretty curious as to what the near future holds...

[thod]

is it possible to engineer/tamper viruses that can manipulate DNA for an intended effect? Are there viruses that can change DNA?


There have been numerous trials of using altered viruses. Reprogramming cells to produce insulin etc. They had some, but very limited success.

[rocksteady]

There have been numerous trials of using altered viruses. Reprogramming cells to produce insulin etc. They had some, but very limited success.

seems like a slippery slope, but something that could lead to some innovation.


so, if i wanted a designer baby, where would I edit the DNA, in the zygote stage? or could you infect a sperm and the egg separately with a virus tailored to rid them of genetic birth defects?

[Drayakir]

Rocksteady: Ideally, when you've got the zygote, and it's still one cell. Although it's kinda hard to predict whether a virus will kill it. The thing is, like I said, it's very unrefined at this point. Basically, what would happen is that you're firing artillery shells to hit a pigeon. There's no guarantee that, say a retrovirus, will manage to deliver the payload.

[Vortex]

Virus insertion of DNA into target cells has come a long way. Yes, it still has its limitations, but its not near as bad as it used to be, or is necessarily being painted as in this thread.

There was recently a cat in South Korea IIRC that had been genetically modified to glow in the dark in the presence of UV lighting. I believe most of the liter survived the modification process.

I would personally guess that we could see the start of widescale adoption of genetic engineering within around fifty years, assuming politics, religion, and every other loony stays the hell out of it and lets the science get done. That doesn't sound like a very long time - but look back fifty years and see the state of science, engineering, and medicine. With the state of modern computing (and Moore's law along with it), I'm willing to bet we start to see some massive breakthroughs within twenty to thirty years, limited adoption within forty, and then another 10 for society to get used to it.

I personally can't wait. Its about time are species is freed from the constrains of luck.

[AgentofGaming]

They're going to be offering cloned meat en masse in about five years.

Oh and Moore's law is coming to an end in 30 years or so. The power of computing goes up, so does the resources needed to continue doing so. "All good things come to an end"

Of course when Computers start doing the research, then everything will be beyond what we ever comprehended. Especially when computers research how to make better computers.

[rocksteady]

Oh and Moore's law is coming to an end in 30 years or so. The power of computing goes up, so does the resources needed to continue doing so. "All good things come to an end"


Moore's law will end but progress will not.

Molecular Computer (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

We are advancing towards the next Paradigm Shift (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) on our way to the Technologicial Singularity (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[AgentofGaming]

Moore's law will end but progress will not.

Molecular Computer (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

We are advancing towards the next Paradigm Shift (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) on our way to the Technologicial Singularity (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

Well progress may end, say something that forces extinction (global warming, nuclear war, etc) or a new dark age (conservative/moralist forces in society win, etc).

A professor I had asked us "what if only Moore's law applied to other engineering disciplines, you'd see cars get twice as fuel efficient each year". I definitely see molecular computing as the future. I have seen Transistor components in class being compared to 5 atoms. However we need people in nanotechnology to bypass this barrier before we can build smaller.

[anul]

Ideally if you really needed a designer baby you would find someone with high intellect and good looks, and reproduce with them. If the baby isn't to your standards you could always give it away. Then some lesser family with poor hygiene and bad genes could adopt this reject designer baby. Those poor people could never afford a designer baby let alone produce a baby who can speak properly. They should be happy to have a substandard designer baby.