PKPolitics Discuss » Science and Technology

'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists

(21 posts)
  1. zia m
    Member

    This could have moral and ethical implications.

    The synthetic cell looks identical to the 'wild type' Scientists in the US have succeeded in developing the first synthetic living cell.

    The researchers constructed a bacterium's "genetic software" and transplanted it into a host cell.

    The resulting microbe then looked and behaved like the species "dictated" by the synthetic DNA.

    The advance, published in Science, has been hailed as a scientific landmark, but critics say there are dangers posed by synthetic organisms.

    Dr Craig Venter says yeast, chemicals, and computers were used by scientists
    The researchers hope eventually to design bacterial cells that will produce medicines and fuels and even absorb greenhouse gases.

    The team was led by Dr Craig Venter of the J Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) in Maryland and California.

    He and his colleagues had previously made a synthetic bacterial genome, and transplanted the genome of one bacterium into another.

    Dr Venter likened the advance to making new software for the cell.

    Dr Venter told BBC News: "We've now been able to take our synthetic chromosome and transplant it into a recipient cell - a different organism.

    "As soon as this new software goes into the cell, the cell reads [it] and converts into the species specified in that genetic code."

    The new bacteria replicated over a billion times, producing copies that contained and were controlled by the constructed, synthetic DNA.

    "This is the first time any synthetic DNA has been in complete control of a cell," said Dr Venter.

    'New industrial revolution'
    Dr Venter and his colleagues hope eventually to design and build new bacteria that will perform useful functions.
    "I think they're going to potentially create a new industrial revolution," he said.

    "If we can really get cells to do the production that we want, they could help wean us off oil and reverse some of the damage to the environment by capturing carbon dioxide."

    ""Even some scientists worry we lack the means to weigh up the risks such novel organisms might represent, once set loose""
    Continue reading.........

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.stm

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 1:21 #
  2. 'and transplanted it into a host cell.' that was not of their own creation!
    Did they created the DNA from their very own created elements such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen etc?
    Was the planted DNA also a copy inspired from DNA found in any of the known species on earth?
    Or the Godless are trying to be Gods themselves?

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 4:13 #
  3. Moderator Sahib, I recently read one of your posts in which you expressed in ringing tones your faith in West science. If you'll allow me to reply here to that. Science is all very well in its own place. It can change life for the better for mankind. On the other hand, like in zia m's thread above and your caustic reply, it can also be simply a scam, a fraud. Which brings me to the point I wish to make. There is a lot of fraud in medical science, but the worst to my mind, the death of humanity kind of scsm, is the genetically modified seeds being spread round the world by US Monsanto. God willing, Pakistan at least will be saved from that. Crop after crop failing round the world. And soon no food to feed anyone at all.

    The above sounds like another DNA dream, like cloning. I doubt that it will lead to anything longlasting.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 6:07 #
  4. @Mirza Ghalib
    My trust in western science is certainly not a blind folded one. AlhamdoLillah I am attached to a couple of scientific fields one of them being the field of Forensics. Enough to see what lies concealed in news out bursts of this nature.
    At most this is manipulation of a genetic block work that is going on since quite a long time as you have correctly pointed out...Genetic Modification.
    Would I believe in this? No because man is incapable to produce matter on his own therefore he is also incapable to produce something called 'life'.
    There is a huge difference between 'to exist' and 'to be alive'.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 6:44 #
  5. Thank you, Moderator Sahib. I'm glad, so glad, and I hope and pray we shall not go down the GM path like India has so frighteningly started to do.

    And my wholehearted agreement about the distinction between "existing" and "being alive", the former being purposeless, the latter conferring an exalted mission to our lives.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 7:23 #
  6. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/discoveries/2010-05-21-genome21_ST_N.htm?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+(News+-+Top+Stories)

    http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/synthetic_genome.dtl
    http://www.sciencemag.org/
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2010/05/20/did-craig-venter-just-create-synthetic-life-the-jury-is-decidedly-out/
    related information to understand what is going on. Enjoy!
    "This is not life from scratch," Venter says. "We are taking advantage of 3 billion years of evolution to transplant a genome into a cell."
    "This is the first self-replicating cell we've had on the planet whose parent is a computer," says team chief Craig Venter
    But many experts say that since Venter copied a pre-existing genome, he didn’t really create a new life form.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/science/21cell.html
    Some other scientists said that aside from assembling a large piece of DNA, Dr. Venter has not broken new ground. “To my mind Craig has somewhat overplayed the importance of this,” said David Baltimore, a geneticist at Caltech. He described the result as “a technical tour de force,” a matter of scale rather than a scientific breakthrough.

    “He has not created life, only mimicked it,” Dr. Baltimore said.

    Dr. Venter’s assertion that he has created a “synthetic cell” has alarmed people who think that means he has created a new life form or an artificial cell. “Of course that’s not right — its ancestor is a biological life form,” said Dr. Joyce of Scripps.

    Dr. Venter copied the DNA from one species of bacteria and inserted it into another. The second bacteria made all the proteins and organelles in the so-called “synthetic cell,” by following the specifications implicit in the structure of the inserted DNA.

    “My worry is that some people are going to draw the conclusion that they have created a new life form,” said Jim Collins, a bioengineer at Boston University. “What they have created is an organism with a synthesized natural genome. But it doesn’t represent the creation of life from scratch or the creation of a new life form,” he said.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 7:59 #
  7. Thanks lota for this post. Dr. Venter has confirmed it is not creation of life from scratch as claimed or appears to be. It remains to be another hoax among countless bogus scientific claims.
    Even the term 'Artificial life' sounds bogus without any life in it!
    Life is life and never artificial!

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 8:35 #
  8. zia m
    Member

    Craig Venter is not trying to play god or prove anything.He has just created a new technology that can benefit mankind and the planet if used wisely.
    I think this will be a memorable day in history that can change the world like microchip did.

    MG,
    Genetic engineering has been going on for centuries.The grafting of fruit trees to produce better taste and yield of fruit is just one example.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 8:41 #
  9. @semirza
    Your welcome
    @zia m
    This is a very scary development. The biological military weapons that can be designed using this technology will be much worse than nuclear weapons and might even wipe most life off this planet.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 8:50 #
  10. zia m
    Member

    Lota,
    Right, that is why i said "if used wisely".

    here is link to his video.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/video/2010/may/20/craig-venter-new-life-form

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 8:54 #
  11. zia m, Agreed. And perhaps the differance lies in the use of a word, engineering versus modification. One works, the other doesn't. One is a natural effort on the part of farmers or agronomists. The other is in an industrial process on the part of biologists and the like who've probably never grown a thing in their lives. Whatever, the point is the second process is failing the globe over and affects millions and millions of lives. But since it's big business it is considered sacrosanct. For me, this is about as bad as the nuclear bomb, death on a slow burner. I just hope Pakistan never gets into Monsanto clutches. That is all. As for Mr Venter, I think his experiments will also go the way of all flesh, nowhere that is. Though, I expect, there might be a breakthrough somewhere, sometime, in genetically useful medicine.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 8:56 #
  12. zia m
    Member

    MG,
    The way world population is growing, we won't have much choice either starve or use technology to produce more food.
    They can genetically alter the seeds to prevent plant diseases.

    http://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~mcclean/plsc731/homework/papers/mcdowell%20and%20woffenden%20-%20plant%20disease%20resistance%20genes%20-%20recent%20insights%20and%20potential%20applications.pdf

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 9:15 #
  13. Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @zia m: I quote;

    --------------------------------------------------------
    The way world population is growing, we won't have much choice either starve or use technology to produce more food.
    --------------------------------------------------------

    (1) O bhaee propaganda karna band! karo

    Food production or food prices are artificially getting affected. They are getting affected because of widespread injustice.

    (2) ALLAH aur us ke nabi (SAW) ke batae hue;

    (a) land reforms ko lagoo karo. INSHALLAH, itna khana ho ga ke khatam nahi hone ko ae ga

    (b) insaf ke nizam ko lagoo karo. INSHALLAH, itni khush-hali ho gi ke dekhte reh jao ke

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 9:23 #
  14. zia m, I'm sorry. I'm with HK on this one. Monsanto cannot be trusted to get it right. It's proved it time and time again. And an argument which may carry weight with you: Europe has so far refused to allow it into its own agriculture. If it worked, why should I have anything against it. But it hasn't so far. Back to the drawing board, please, and find something that makes better sense. A Pakistani agronomsit could do it, instead of such stuff always having to come to us from the other side.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 10:10 #
  15. The third world should brace itself against another outbreak of a deadly unknown viral strain taking the form of epidemics similar to the past flues etc in the not so distant future.

    Perhaps a market for a new vaccine to be sold out on a massive scale to guinea pig states that is the third world!

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 10:28 #
  16. semirza sahib, I sincerely hope not. The last example of that scam goes back only a few months ago. And it brought in billions for that Swiss pharma concern one calls Novartis and allowed it to announce a "profit" for the year. For nothing. Now all the countries holding these vaccines don't know what to do with them. Probably send them as aid to people in Haiti or Black Africa.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 10:53 #
  17. zia m
    Member

    The use of pseticides and fertilizers are more harmful than the GMOs.
    Insulin, hepatitis b and other vaccines are all genetically engineered.
    With the exception of Europe and Japan, most other countries allow GM foods.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 10:55 #
  18. zia m, OK. But the problem is why are these Monsanto crops failing? In US, in South Africa, in India. A further sadness there. Their seeds are not reutilisable, which means to sow, every year you have to buy fresh seeds. For the poor Indian farmer this is the death sentence. And many have carried it out on themselves by committing suicide.

    Can we come to a compromise this way: Genetically engineered need not necessarily be bad. Monsanto is not quite OK yet? That other countries might be using it, see Moderator Sahib's last post. You can convince countries to do a lot of things against even their own interest.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 11:17 #
  19. zia m
    Member

    I'm not promoting Monsanto here.Most of the food consumed in the world has some aspect of genetic engineering.But the controversy on GM will continue for a few more years.

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 11:23 #
  20. A look at Monsanto and the harm they do to everyone around them.

    Controlling Our Food - The World According to Monsanto
    http://www.livevideo.com/video/Smokescreen/1C4FB64D50354B9A856504954B453CC9/the-world-according-to-monsant.aspx

    Posted 2 years ago on 21 May 2010 12:32 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.