3-Parent Embryo

By Alex in Science & Tech on Apr 18, 2010 at 1:11 am

If you think cloning humans is controversial, science is about to throw another curve ball: 3-parent embryos.

Researchers have produced human embryos containing DNA from three people, a biotechnological proof-of-principle with profound medical and ethical implications.

To accomplish this, chromosomes were taken from one zygote — the single cell formed when sperm and egg fuse — and put into a zygote stripped of its original chromosomes, but left with its original mitochondria, which provide each human cell with energy.

As they grew, the resulting embryos contained so-called nuclear DNA — the 25,000 genes responsible for physical and developmental traits — from two traditional parents, and mitochondrial DNA from a third.

The technique is a subtle form of genetic engineering, which many people consider taboo, and raises other ethical dilemmas. It could also allow parents whose progeny would otherwise suffer from deadly mitochondrial diseases to have healthy children.

Link


Email This Post
Tweet This Post 
Share This Post on Facebook

Tags: ,


Neat stuff from the NeatoShop:


  1. felixthecat
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 4:40 am

    The ethical dilemmas will almost entirely be religious in nature, and popular also among the “we’re playing God!!!”-type Luddites.

  2. Briannana
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 5:52 am

    This, like any other scientific tool, will have positive and negative effects. It’s just the way it works. But, it is a very nice display of your clear agenda-driven beliefs, felix.

  3. Pam Walter
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 7:52 am

    Another example of how our technology has outdistanced our wisdom. I’m not sure we’re intellectually, spiritually, emotionally, or mentally able to deal with the implications of our own cleverness.

  4. A Noun
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 7:59 am

    Ah yes, the binnaum.

  5. felixthecat
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 8:29 am

    Thank you, Briannana. Perhaps you would be so kind as to expound upon the negative effects? The positive effects seem clear: less suffering for children, parents who could not safely have children before may now do so, and so on. However, the negative effects seem less obvious.

    Thank you in advance.

  6. Nimrod
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 8:40 am

    Come and knock on our door…..
    (Come and knock on our door…..)
    We’ve been waiting for you……
    (We’ve been waiting for you……)
    Where the kisses are hers and hers and his,
    Three’s company too.

    Come and dance on on our floor……
    Take a step that is new…..

  7. D Bozko
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 9:21 am

    Well felix I think the negative implications are that mankind isn’t known for being completely alturistic and as such things like creation of a “master race” comes to mind. Eleminating disease and defects are great and worthy goals but who decides what defects are worthy of eleminating. It would seem simple enough except there was a time when things like being left handed was considered a defect. Physical traits in one part of the world may be wanted whereas in another part of the world those traits are scorned. Briannana was right. There are always positive and negative sides to most every issue and they aren’t all driven by religious belief. You can have concerns about this type of science other than the “we’re playing God” aspect of it.

  8. Briannana
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 11:41 am

    Felix,
    How about an abomination? How about a completely new set of genome issues that we can’t even understand? I mean, I guess we’re just going to have to test it to find out. But humans are incredibly complex creatures, and we don’t even understand how genetics work in their entirety. Much too soon to be tinkering, I believe.

  9. Nimrod
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 12:56 pm

    {Spoken in my best “old Coot” voice}

    “Back in my Day someone had to get divorced to have extra Grandparents….”

  10. emmakate
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    Huh, the only thing I was thinking before I read the comments was that this would be great for polyamorous people with more than one mate!

  11. ted
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 2:53 pm

    Didn’t Mother Nature give us and easier and much more fun way to make babies?

    I’m just not sure why we need to improve on the original idea.

    It’s not like the human race is in danger of zero population growth.

  12. Vonskippy
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 4:14 pm

    @Briannana

    Do you understand how sex works in it’s entirety? Didn’t think so.

    3-parent embryos is a nice bit of science, but as Ted states, completely unnecessary, and just another narcissistic procedure for the fools who use fertility/conception clinics to spend their money on.

  13. felixthecat
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    Well, those are good answers. Thank you.

  14. SarahW
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 4:43 pm

    Vonskippy, easy to say if you don’t face the prospect of no kids, or a kid with mitochondrial disease. Say you could have bear a child who had chromosomes from father and mother but would be spared the disease?

  15. Vonskippy
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 5:59 pm

    SarahW – there’s 6 billion plus people on the planet. If your genetic makeup is flawed, that’s Darwin’s way of telling you to adopt and stay out of the gene pool.

  16. ted
    Apr 18th, 2010 at 8:15 pm

    Frankly put, Vonskippy, but true. Does everybody HAVE to have children?

    If you face the prospect of no kids, it’s not the end of the world. You get over it. Maybe you adopt.

    It is the will of Darwin. Darwin be praised.

  17. LisaL
    Apr 19th, 2010 at 10:12 am

    WHy go and bash fertility clinics?
    It’s so easy to bash on fertility treatments or to tell people to just adopt when you have nothing wrong.
    My husband and myself are going through fertility treatments right now. And it just amazes and saddens me that people would think that that’s a bad thing. I mean seriouly, it just breaks my heart.

    So I guess people who have cancer should just give up and not fight it. Or people who have diabetes. I guess they shouldn’t be taking insulin b/c hey, it’s just nature trying to kill them off right?

  18. ted
    Apr 19th, 2010 at 12:51 pm

    It’s not a bad thing, LisaL.

    What is the end result of cancer research? You don’t die. You don’t get much other choice except try to live or give up and die.

    What is the end result of fertility treatment? You get a baby. You could have gotten a baby via a number of alternative methods, but it feels so nice to have your own. It satisfies an instinct.

    The “3-parent” research here is something else entirely. I’m surprised they’re allowed to perform this experiment on human zygotes.

  19. Christophe
    Apr 20th, 2010 at 11:18 am

    Wow! they found a solution for the French Ménage a trois!

  20. carla zavaroni
    Aug 27th, 2010 at 9:06 am

    Hi,

    I am wondering will they use this 3 parent
    embryo technique for women over 40 whose eggs
    apparently have more chromosomal abnormalities
    and have a smaller chance of success in than say
    a woman 37. I believe 37 is the avarage age for
    egg donation in ivf.

    I believe that screening is done in the mitochondria
    but would it be possible to screen out all
    chromosomal abnormalites in a woman’s eggs say
    over 40 years of age in the nucleous of her eggs and replace all the faulty chromosomes with someone elses.

    I look forward to your reply. Carla Zavaroni


Keep track of the comments with Comment RSS

Don't Miss: New Stuff | Bestsellers | The Cute Store
                   Funny T-Shirts

Need a gift? Get unforgettable gifts for:
Geeks | Pranksters | Kids | Hipsters | Shutterbugs

Lijit Search

Old school? Bookmark us! RSS Feed Twitter Facebook Page